What do you think of the game? (spoiler)

This forum is to be used for all discussions pertaining to any of the titles or expansions within the Mass Effect series.
User avatar
Mandalorianx
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:41 am
Contact:
What do you think of the game? (spoiler)

Postby Mandalorianx » Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:56 am

the title expleins it self.

it might be a bit early to ask, but wanted to hear what you all think of the game so far.

so far i think this game is 1 of the best i've played so far, being trown into action from the very start of the game, with the attack on the normandy(old).
and with the intence battle, the grafic and planet are all awesome.

but now, its time to play some more :D
Zabuza Momochi: [color="DeepSkyBlue"]Your words cut deep....Deeper than any blade.[/color]

User avatar
Curry
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 3:04 pm
Location: Cold North
Contact:

Postby Curry » Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:38 am

I just finished Mass Effect 2 and liked it a lot, especially the ending was sweet. Definitely makes Dragon Age look like a piece of garbage.
The problem is that the people with the most ridiculous ideas are always the people who are most certain of them.

User avatar
Daynov
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:38 pm
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Postby Daynov » Mon Feb 01, 2010 10:42 am

More like it makes Dragon Age looks like a hardcore RPG and Mass Effect 2 like a talking shooter with its rpg elements further lobotomized. Though that's not the point of the discussion. I think both games are great for what they are. Afterall each delivers very different experience.

User avatar
boj4ngles
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 1:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Postby boj4ngles » Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:40 am

I thought ME2 was excellent and a major improvement over ME1 in almost every respect. The biggest improvement was in combat, which featured better AI, a tighter cover system, and a highly differentiated set of classes. The settings also had more flavor, as well as the new organization that Shepard works for, (even if the "mysteriousness" was over done occasionally). Fans of the first will love it, and I suspect it will even win over some rpg fans who don't usually delve into the realm of third person shooters.

And it really is a third person shooter in most respects. There is only minimal inventory management (although it is well done), and making headshots is just as important as planning out your abilities progression. What makes it an action rpg are excellent characters and dialogue trees, as well as behavioral choices for your main character. Rather than choose between good or evil, your character is defined more in terms of "good cop, bad cop".

Is it better than DA:O? If I had to choose I'd go with DA:O but I don't really think it's fair to compare them. Both are trying for vastly different experiences. Both combat and dialogue in ME2 are meant to be taken at a faster pace then DA:O, and the traditional staples of rpg have been intentionally minimized. ME2 is more like watching a movie, DA:O is more like reading a book.

User avatar
Aqua-chan
Posts: 4607
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:17 am
Location: Right Off Elsewhere
Contact:

Postby Aqua-chan » Mon Feb 01, 2010 6:26 pm

Mass 2, to me, was fun to play. I'm a fan of the franchise, I feel like the in-game universe is "growing up" into an actual sci-fi setting instead of just ripping elements from "those who came before", and I think BioWare listened and corrected a lot of the original issues.

A lot of my initial fears were that the old team were going to be scrapped, and the new team was going to consist of stereotypical pawns with the depth of a shoebox. That wasn't at all the case. Even the one I had worried the most for, Subject Zero, panned out to be something that I grew to be interested in. At one point I thought she'd been killed and braced myself for a reload as I was unwilling to let her go.

The romances, if you can call them that, are intended to be brief flings meant (I presume) to derail Shepard from their primary love interest in Mass 1. A picture of Kaidan in my Shepard's quarters was turned face-down when she started getting flirty with Archangel, and I can only imagine that this is meant to cause a dramatic confrontation in 3. Given that BioWare does so love that plot (Happens in Mass 1, Dragon Age, Baldur's Gate, jeeze), I won't be surprised if it's an echo of the first "You have to chooooose, Shepard!" scene.

I hate the new inventory system and leveling. You don't know a gun's stats, so comparing Pistol A to Pistol B is a trial. You have to go out into the field and test them to see what works for you. But you can't trade out your pistols to try them unless there happens to be an armory station nearby, which there rarely is. My infiltrator used a powerful sniper rifle as a primary weapon, and upon picking up an upgrade to the gun, it was immediately applied without my say-so. My one-hit kill weapon became specced to take out biotic shields, fired more slowly, and required about six shots to kill. I was unhappy.

Leveling is another issue I have. Skills have all been dumbed down so that now characters have access to about half the abilities they did before. As a tech specialist I no longer have overload or sabotage, but only certain tech party members do. I don't really understand what the purpose was. It's not like the abilities wouldn't be useful when two heavy mechs are bearing down on you.

But the combat is far better. I actually have fun going into fights, getting my ass kicked a few times, then reloading to try again or shut the game off while I take a breather. It's actually tactical. I really don't know why BW went back on their cannon science by making it so that small guns need "heat sinks" (ammo) now though. Just seems like backtracking to me.
[SIZE="1"][color="Pink"]"There are worse things in the world than serving the whims of a deadly sex goddess." - Zevran[/color][/size]

User avatar
Bloodstalker
Posts: 15512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Hell if I know
Contact:

Postby Bloodstalker » Mon Feb 01, 2010 8:18 pm

I thought the game was overall much better than the first game. I liked ME1, but the combat...well, I suck at shooters pretty much, and the controls were a bit clunky for me. Combat is much improved in this game. Squad AI is a lot better than it was previously and the control changes seem to allow for combat to feel much more fluid than it did in the last game.

I liked most of the characters available also. They seem fleshed out and pretty well done. As far as the romances go, there are several otpions and some are better than others. As AC said, they do have a "fling" feel to them. I read somewhere that one of the developers stated players who remain loyal to their original love interest from the first game will get a reward in the final game, but how that works out remains to be seen. Makes sense why they cut the main love interest out of the game though if they wanted to make sure those characters survived for the final installment. I guess they wanted a feeling of anyone being in danger of death and didn't want to cheapen that feeling by hard coding the survival of a couple characters here.

I actually love the new inventory system. The original was so cluttered that I never even bothered to got and look through my inventory much. It was a headache. This time, not so much. I still would have liked to at least be able to choose to change weapons when you picked them up rather than just having to live with the upgrade for the remainder of the mission. The system of outfitting my characters didn't bother me so much outside of that.

Scanning planets sucks. It's repetitive and drawn out, and I just really didn't like that aspect at all. But, I am happy the Mako is no more at least. That bouncing rubber ball machine will not be missed by me at all. Haven;t imported a character yet, so I don;t know how extensive the changes might be under that scenario, but it seems that there is room for a few different options based on what you did in the first game....apparently, I made all the "wrong" decisions in ME1 since the new character I created generally chose and did the opposite of what I did.

I liked the first game, but this is a big improvement in most aspects.
Lord of Lurkers

Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!

User avatar
BuckGB
Posts: 1576
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 10:00 pm
Contact:

Postby BuckGB » Tue Feb 02, 2010 11:10 am

I wasn't much of a fan of the first Mass Effect, yet I consider it the better game of the two. In my opinion, the only thing Mass Effect 2 has going for it is the improved combat (if you can overlook the absurdity of crates and other cover suddenly appearing whenever a fight is about to begin) and the inclusion of Thane (the only character I feel is on par with Wrex). Resource gathering is a chore (try visiting every planet on multiple play-throughs...), the mini-games are fun for about 30 seconds, the inventory system is nothing short of horrendous, and the removal of virtually all statistics, leveling gains, and other role-playing mechanics makes it a forgettable game for me. Hell, there isn't even a single non-combat ability to be found.

I also felt like the storyline was more cohesive in Mass Effect - and the first game's ending was far more satisfying. The sinister plot we were uncovering all along was the bug-like modification of the Prothean race and the construction of a human genetic sludge-filled Reaper? Really? To me, that pales in comparison to going up against an indoctrinated Spectre (Saren), discovering Sovereign's identity, and then eventually uncovering the true purpose of the Citadel.

And as far as dialogue goes, there wasn't a single conversation that stuck with me like the one we had with Sovereign and the Prothean virtual intelligence Vigil in ME1. The Illusive Man was the only NPC with some definite potential in ME2, but then they limited him to just periodically handing out orders. A missed opportunity, in my opinion.

With all that said, though, I don't think Mass Effect 2 is necessarily a bad game. If you're looking for a decent sci-fi storyline, solid graphics, and stellar voice acting, then it's certainly a good candidate. Just don't go in looking for any depth because it just isn't there.

User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Postby Xandax » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:13 pm

I wrote about what I think more deeply in the blog section (My impression of Mass Effect 2 (thus far) - No game spoilers. - GameBanshee Forums) but I disagree very much with Buck here.

The NPCs in the sequel here stand out far much more then in ME1 in my opinion. The personality of the characters like Jack and Miranda for example far outdo anybody in ME1.

The issues with lack of inventory is apparent, lack of statistical value and simplification of skills and the abhorrent resource scanning "mini-game" are all silly and/or stupid things. However the inventory in ME1 was also extremely poorly made.
And the hacking mini-game and the bypass one are far more well thought out and acceptable then the equivalent circle navigation one in ME1 which was used for everything.
The "exploration" of ME1 was also a weak point, so it does not hold any sway over ME2 in that area.

The combat of ME2 is much more fluent then in ME1 - the weapons carry more "weight" although I do miss the statistical values on them. The interface lends itself much better to the game now then it did in ME1 where I felt the character stumbled over himself each time he stopped and how he kept sticking to the wall when ever I did not want it.

The NPCs in ME2 are overall of a much higher quality with much deeper personalities then anything in ME1. The only "interesting" character in ME1 was IMO T'Soni (and no, not for the romance plot), but in ME2 even a character like Garrius suddenly takes form. The characters personalities are much more developed this time around. Jack's and Miranda's story lines - for example - were very well crafted.
The Illusive man I agree with had potential, but was underutilized and too much a cliché.

Overall - I'd score Mass Effect 1 around a 6 out of 10, but I give Mass Effect 2 a 8-9 out of 10. It is magnitudes in front of ME1 in most all aspects. Let me say it this way: Mass Effect 2 makes me want to replay Mass Effect 1, just to be able to import another character into that game. That's how much better ME2 is then ME1.


I think the main issue for many - well, I guess - is that Mass Effect 2 is much more action/TPS with a story and some RPG elements whereas Mass Effect 1 attempted to be an action RPG (which it failed to do hard, compared to games like Deus Ex)
Insert signature here.

User avatar
jklinders
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:17 pm
Location: Halifax NS Canada
Contact:

Postby jklinders » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:46 pm

In the end game now, far enough to form an opinion anyway. I'll go point to point. to keep it simple.

1 Story, ME1 had an overall better story in my opinion, but I believe that I have that opinion for 2 reasons. I like story beginnings, a lot actually, when an ending is left open, that is frequently better for me than trying and failing to finish it up. Second reason, ME2 is a transition game between beginning and end. Plot is usually weaker as a result. One thing I did like about the story was it's emphasis on loyalty and trust. Whole plot revolves around it, and done in a way that did not make me sick of it.

2 Characters, way better. Garrus going on about a mirror and his looks in the first scene after you recruit him put a smile on my face and I thought "damn, they actually gave him a personality!" He was the weakest character in ME1, still among the weaker in ME 2, but at least he is believable now.

3 RPG system Frankly the stats system in ME1 sucked. Honestly, any change was going to only make it suck as bad, or improve it. The streamlining is a little controversial here, but an improvement overall. Where you put your points have a lot more weight. I never really noticed a 1.75% change in the attack or defense adding points in ME1 did, loss of non combat skills a little troubling from an RPG standpoint, but as the role playing focus was on the conversation system, I did not feel like I lost anything. Besides the interrupt system is pretty cool.

4 Combat, looks like some fudging was done with the ammo, oh sorry I meant heat clips. Taking the spraying and praying out of combat was a massive improvement. Testing weapons before use would have been nice. The upgraded heavy pistol was a big shock to me. Liking no inventory, seems to suit the setting. Using different weapons actually means something. In ME1 best weapon type was the pistol. Kind of gimped the soldier, since the soldier's big advantage was having access to assault rifle.

Sorry about the wall of text, got carried away I guess, If you got this far thanks for reading.

User avatar
BuckGB
Posts: 1576
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 10:00 pm
Contact:

Postby BuckGB » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:58 pm

Based on the reception the game is getting, I'm certainly in the minority with my opinions. I'll do my best to explain them further.

Xandax wrote:The NPCs in the sequel here stand out far much more then in ME1 in my opinion. The personality of the characters like Jack and Miranda for example far outdo anybody in ME1.


Again, these are only my opinions :) . The only squad member I'll remember a year from now is Thane. I felt that his own personal take on his profession, his debilitating disease, the family life he left behind, etc. all seemed more carefully constructed than Jack's "I was orphaned and Cerberus messed with me so I'm angry!" and Miranda's "There's more to me than my genetic enhancements!" backstories.

Xandax wrote:The issues with lack of inventory is apparent, lack of statistical value and simplification of skills and the abhorrent resource scanning "mini-game" are all silly and/or stupid things. However the inventory in ME1 was also extremely poorly made.


The inventory in Mass Effect was terrible, but somehow BioWare managed to get it worse in the sequel. The armor system is a mess, and the fact that they require you to don each armor suit in its entirety (including the face-covering helmets) is ridiculous. You're pretty much forced to go with the piecemeal route, leaving you to choose between a handful of items with small bonuses that feel like an afterthought, at best. They're the only statistics we get, though, so I guess that's something.

Xandax wrote:And the hacking mini-game and the bypass one are far more well thought out and acceptable then the equivalent circle navigation one in ME1 which was used for everything.


I played the Xbox 360 version of ME1 (since it was out first and I had to cover it for GB), so I'm not familiar with the circle navigation minigame. The XYAB minigame on the 360 version was certainly lame, but I don't remember having to use it very often and it was quick and painless. It also required you to have the sufficient non-combat skill to even try it - something ME2 sadly neglects.

Xandax wrote:The combat of ME2 is much more fluent then in ME1 - the weapons carry more "weight" although I do miss the statistical values on them. The interface lends itself much better to the game now then it did in ME1 where I felt the character stumbled over himself each time he stopped and how he kept sticking to the wall when ever I did not want it.


Personally, I think this is the only real area where Mass Effect 2 surpasses its predecessor. The controls and combat system are better, but I think this is mainly because the sequel successfully mimics other AAA shooters. Bringing the pace, controls, and cover system in line with what worked in the Gears of War, Uncharted, and other similar series was a good move.

Xandax wrote:The NPCs in ME2 are overall of a much higher quality with much deeper personalities then anything in ME1. The only "interesting" character in ME1 was IMO T'Soni (and no, not for the romance plot), but in ME2 even a character like Garrius suddenly takes form. The characters personalities are much more developed this time around. Jack's and Miranda's story lines - for example - were very well crafted.


Again, the only squad members I've felt had a memorable personality were Urdnot Wrex and Thane Krios. And even then, I wouldn't consider either to be among BioWare's best written characters.

Xandax wrote:It is magnitudes in front of ME1 in most all aspects.


This seems to be the general consensus, so I guess I'm just not seeing what others are. To me, the first game was better in the two most crucial areas (for me, anyway) - story and RPG elements. If it's a good combat system that I want, then there are better choices than the Mass Effect series.

Regardless, I'd take Dragon Age: Origins any day over a Mass Effect title :) .

User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Postby Xandax » Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:31 pm

I think one reason I'm excited about ME2 is that I had no expectations because I really did not like ME1. So when I recieved a well crafted game with well crafted NPCs and an even better level of voice acting (except for male Sheppard, I still don't like his) - then I got "blown" away. And then when I started to "care" for the NPCs due to their backstories and side-quests - well, it is successful to me.

BuckGB wrote:<snip>
I played the Xbox 360 version of ME1 (since it was out first and I had to cover it for GB), so I'm not familiar with the circle navigation minigame. The XYAB minigame on the 360 version was certainly lame, but I don't remember having to use it very often and it was quick and painless. It also required you to have the sufficient non-combat skill to even try it - something ME2 sadly neglects.
<snip>


In the PC version you had to navigate some cursor into the center of a circle while avoiding other moving cursors. It was used for decrypting, hacking, recovering stuff and surveying minerals.
It was athrotiously annoyingly made or you had to spend "omni-gel" on avoiding it. Luckily - because the inventory was poor, I omi-gel'ed most equipment anyway to avoid having to deal with picking it up and organizing it afterwards.

BuckGB wrote:<snip>
Again, these are only my opinions :) . The only squad member I'll remember a year from now is Thane. I felt that his own personal take on his profession, his debilitating disease, the family life he left behind, etc. all seemed more carefully constructed than Jack's "I was orphaned and Cerberus messed with me so I'm angry!" and Miranda's "There's more to me than my genetic enhancements!" backstories.<snip>

I find it strange you consider Wrex more crafted ("angry" Krogan who seemingly doesn't care about the genophage that much) then Miranda and her trying to save her sister and acceptance of being engineered story but it is personal taste.
To me Wrex is insignificant because his "actions" in ME1 mean very little, especially when viewing how he's evolved in ME2. In ME2 you get a much more in depth view of his motivations and actions then in ME1.

I would have loved to see the NPCs in ME2 explored even more fully as there's a vast amount of room within those backstories - but well, I guess it would be expecting too much in forms of story - but compared to ME1, I find it hard to understand the taste difference.


BuckGB wrote:<snip>
Regardless, I'd take Dragon Age: Origins any day over a Mass Effect title :) .


As a game I play once or twice like DA:O better then ME2 and scores better then ME1, however for actual replayability - DA:O is far more limited then ME2 due to all the tie-ins with ME1 and the greater depth of the NPCs and choices.

I must admit - that I'm already looking forward to ME3, mostly to see how the tie-ins work in that game and whether ME1 actions still carry an effect.
Insert signature here.

User avatar
BuckGB
Posts: 1576
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 10:00 pm
Contact:

Postby BuckGB » Tue Feb 02, 2010 2:11 pm

Xandax wrote:I find it strange you consider Wrex more crafted ("angry" Krogan who seemingly doesn't care about the genophage that much) then Miranda and her trying to save her sister and acceptance of being engineered story but it is personal taste.

To me Wrex is insignificant because his "actions" in ME1 mean very little, especially when viewing how he's evolved in ME2. In ME2 you get a much more in depth view of his motivations and actions then in ME1.


Wrex's appeal to me is a combination of his unique race (at the time), his banter while exploring (Miranda never said anything notable outside of the Normandy), his motivations for being in your squad, and his input on the genophage. The fact that he went on to form a clan with the purpose of unifying and strengthening his race in the sequel only makes him more memorable for me.

And other than the Kaidan/Ashley choice, Wrex is the only squad member that's involved with a player decision that has any real effect on the series. By comparison, Miranda doesn't have any bearing on the Mass Effect story. She could be removed in ME3 and it wouldn't mean a thing, whereas Wrex plays a major role in the future of an entire race. I'd be willing to bet money that he even leads them against the Reapers in ME3.

Xandax wrote:I must admit - that I'm already looking forward to ME3, mostly to see how the tie-ins work in that game and whether ME1 actions still carry an effect.


It'll be interesting to finally see the Reapers with a major presence in Mass Effect 3, but at this rate, I'm not expecting much more than a straight-up action game for the final installment. Considering that Star Wars: KotOR was the original inspiration for the ME series, it's amazing how stripped down it's become.

User avatar
Bloodstalker
Posts: 15512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Hell if I know
Contact:

Postby Bloodstalker » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:31 pm

BuckGB wrote:Wrex's appeal to me is a combination of his unique race (at the time), his banter while exploring (Miranda never said anything notable outside of the Normandy), his motivations for being in your squad, and his input on the genophage. The fact that he went on to form a clan with the purpose of unifying and strengthening his race in the sequel only makes him more memorable for me.

And other than the Kaidan/Ashley choice, Wrex is the only squad member that's involved with a player decision that has any real effect on the series. By comparison, Miranda doesn't have any bearing on the Mass Effect story. She could be removed in ME3 and it wouldn't mean a thing, whereas Wrex plays a major role on the future of an entire race. I'd be willing to bet money that he even leads them against the Reapers in ME3.


To be fair here, Wrex plays an important role in the ME universe only provided you don't kill him *which the game assumes you do if you don't import a character*. So, it seems as if, according to BW chpoices for the second game, the official canon doesn't include Wrex past the first installment of the series. Also, that only really got revealed in ME2. It wasn't something we were completely aware of in the first installment. As such, I doubt we can really predict what kind of impact Miranda or any other character may have in the next installment, She is very closely tied to Cerberus, and it may be that she plays a vital role in dealing with that organization in the conclusion.

Thane was, to me anyway, one of the weaker characters in the game. The whole family issues between him and his son really sounded a lot like Carth's issues from KotOR. I just didn't really see much that interested me in the whole "assassin about to die and brooding about how he can atone for his evil and tortured past" routine. To me, it actually wasn't all that different in substance from Subject Zero's history save for the fact that I thought her situation had a more human element to it. She really seemed troubled and conflicted, but once you broke through, she kinda wanted to believe in better things. Thane was simply too similar to the deathbed confession stereotype...kind of like how convict find religion in prison.

As I said though, the planetary exploration sucks. But I'd much rather do the scan thing from ME2 than to del with the horrible Mako centered exploration of ME1. Myself, I wouldn't mind seeing the whole exploration thing dumped completely, or at the very least implement some kind of system similar to trhe research system here that just lets you scan a planet with one click and be notified of anomolies or resources. Resources should be automatically mined, thus you'd only ever have to deal with actual missions on a planet. But I really don't like busy work in my games, so that's just me.
Lord of Lurkers

Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!

User avatar
boj4ngles
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 1:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Postby boj4ngles » Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:31 pm

BuckGB wrote:I also felt like the storyline was more cohesive in Mass Effect - and the first game's ending was far more satisfying. The sinister plot we were uncovering all along was the bug-like modification of the Prothean race and the construction of a human genetic sludge-filled Reaper? Really? To me, that pales in comparison to going up against an indoctrinated Spectre (Saren), discovering Sovereign's identity, and then eventually uncovering the true purpose of the Citadel.


I have to agree with you that ME2's main quest wasn't as exciting as the first's. In fact I had something of an "is that all?" feeling as the final credits started rolling. The final battle for the collector's station was not 100% satisfying. However what made the game's story superior overall were the settings. Illium was a hedonistic, high tech, laissez-faire planet. Omega, a lawless, destitute backwater. Tuchanka was my favorite. It just makes so much sense that the Krogan homeworld is a post apocalyptic wasteland still feeling the effects of nuclear winter. Of course there are more, and all the locations were illustrated extensively, and with more depth than in ME1.

They even managed to give the Terminus Systems' prominent mercenary groups some distinction. About halfway through it was pretty easy to recognize their tactics and choose your party accordingly. Blue Suns use shields, rockets, and will try to engage you at long range when possible. Blood Pack are weak and poorly outfitted, but they operate in mobs and can be deadly if they swarm you. Eclipse have lots of engineers, and are usually backed up by mechs, so its best bring disruptor ammo and get in close.

Even if the main storyline meandered and plodded, it at least took place in a universe that was fleshed out. I'm pretty optimistic that ME3 will bring it all together in a climactic finale.

As to the inventory, well it's basically nonexistent I admit, but ME1's was so bad that I actually see it as an improvement. The only stat that mattered for weapons was damage, or accuracy on sniper rifles, and inventory management felt like nothing but equipping the newest tier of the same loot over and over again. Bioware must have thought it wasn't worth the time, which is fine with me. On the other hand, anyone who enjoys outfitting their characters and hunting for loot is sure to be disappointed. For me it was a only a minor issue.

User avatar
GawainBS
Posts: 4452
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Glabbeek, Belgium.
Contact:

Postby GawainBS » Wed Feb 03, 2010 3:57 am

ME2 easily fits in my top 5, if you give it some leeway and call it an RPG. ;)

The story was on par with the first one. It's not terribly original, but then again: how many original stories are there? The manner in which it was told, was sublime. The character acting and voice acting is from a level never seen before. I was struck by how vivid expressions were, or the lack there of, when people are obviously bored with you. Small things, like a crying woman who's mascara starts running, or the way people hug, feel genuine.

I really felt connected to my teammembers. Apart from the good dialogues and typical quircks each has, they were very useful in combat.

Combat was a lot better than the first. I didn't hate it in the first, but here it just feels more "appropriate". I did miss the exclusion of serious stats, though. The armour-equipping is cool in theory, but it hasn't got enough effect in actual gameplay. I also hate the fact that your weapons had no visible stats at all. Mind you, you sure noticed a difference in each weapon and upgrade, but I like to see it in stats. On the other hand: I liked it that you have to adapt your weapon choice to the situation. I was a bit disappointed in the Heavy Weapons, though.

The romances are very well done, at least Tali's. It felt genuine and "alive". Too bad the "final" scene was so short. I wouldn't want another "porn game!" incident, but a little bit more of the actual romance would be good. Nice touch that you can spend time with your love intrest in your post-game save.

Finally, something very unexpected: humour! ME2 had me laughing more than DA, and that's quite an achievement. The humour requires quite a lot of in-game/in-universe knowledge, but it was so funny. In fact, it deserves a whole thread on it own!

User avatar
Salidin54
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: In the Code-verse
Contact:

Postby Salidin54 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 12:22 pm

STORY:
ME1: a generic, power armor wearing, space marine gathers a multi-species team of individuals with varying skills and talents, and saves the galaxy from extinction.
ME2: the same generic, power armor wearing, space marine gathers a slightly different multi-species team of individuals with somewhat less capacity for varying skills and talents, and saves the galaxy (again) from a race of *spoiler* [SPOILER] creepy bug people[/SPOILER].

COMBAT:
ME1: a third person shooter based around cover based shooting with a very wide variety of weapons, weapon mod-things, and force powers. I played Gears of War 1 and thought that the cover based combat in that game was some of the worst gun-play I've ever experienced, ME1 on the other hand was pretty good because the AI was smarter than a blunt sword, and didn't charge you every single time.
ME2: third person again but this time with less weapons, less mod-things, slightly different force powers, and ammo. Ugh.

IMMERSION:
ME1: I actually sort of cared about my characters and tried to make them my buddies so that they wouldn't stab me in the back and make me hate them. Third person ruined it though because I could be cowering behind a crate and still see over it. The game did a good job of explaining how things worked if you cared about that sort of thing.
ME2: Having to scan every single planet for the required resources has such a level of immersion to it that I wanted to deplete every planet in as many solar systems as I could, then I finished the game once and I never want to do it again. The writing was decent and conversations were laughable unique. Then I realized that I was playing as a generic, power armor wearing, space marine saving the galaxy......again. Ugh
[SIZE=12px]"FOR THE GLORY OF MOTHER RUSSIA!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"FOR THE SWARM!!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"FOR CHAOS!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"Its pretty good."[/size]

User avatar
aphasia
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:59 am
Contact:

Postby aphasia » Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:31 pm

i've only been playing ME2 for a couple of hours and i'm already feeling it's inferior to its predecessor. for all my rpg needs, i've always visited gamebanshee first (baldur's gate et al., oblivion, fallout, icewind dale, ME1, planescape: torment, KotOR 1 & 2 and titan quest). with the company of games above, ME2 should probably be omitted because it’s so dumbed down.

mass effect 1 was a decent rpg with a few short comings (wretched inventory management, hammy dialoge & bland planet hopping exploration).

though ME was a blantent rip-off of a excellent sci-fi series of a galaxy about to be wiped of all sentient life by an AI believing sentient life is a plague to be cured every 100k years or so (the name of the author and his books escape me at the moment), it had a solid pedigree.
ME2 feels too stripped out and over simplified. no doubt this is due to consolitis.
it really is a shame considering consoles are the way games are heading these days. lobotomising a game genre to fit a gaming platform is disappointing to say the least. i'm not trying to dis consoles as a gaming medium, they are excellent for action based games. i just wish they'd leave rpgs alone at least until they've developed a decent platform & controller.

probably showing my age but is really miss the NPC interaction that baldurs gate (minsc & boo the "miniature giant space hamster"), planescape: torment (morte the cynical floating skull) and KotOR (hk-47 "meatbags") offered in the way of emersion and humour.

over all ME2 could have been much better had they just improved on the short comming of the original (bad inventory management, etc) rather than radically retarding the interface and character and level progression.

User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Postby Xandax » Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:42 pm

aphasia wrote:i've only been playing ME2 for a couple of hours and i'm already feeling it's inferior to its predecessor. for all my rpg needs, i've always visited gamebanshee first (baldur's gate et al., oblivion, fallout, icewind dale, ME1, planescape: torment, KotOR 1 & 2 and titan quest). with the company of games above, ME2 should probably be omitted because it’s so dumbed down.
<snip>


I wouldn't approach ME2 as a RPG though. In fact it is more of an action game with a story attached and some RPG features. As a RPG, however, ME1 also fell rather short, compared to many other Sci-Fi "action RPG" mix.
And ME1 was already "hampered" by the console aspect. ME2 is actually much more fluent and playable on a PC then ME1 ever was.
If I have to have the choice between ME1's shortcomings and ME2s - I'd stick with ME2 each day of the week.
Insert signature here.

User avatar
Salidin54
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: In the Code-verse
Contact:

Postby Salidin54 » Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:16 pm

oops I kinda forgot to actually say what I think about the game. I would have to say that it a GOOD GAME, not a good RPG. Since my game collection is mostly populated by shooters and RTS, the RPGs I do have are all among my favorite games ever. I would have to say that ME2 is not one of those RPGs, in fact I would have to say it's not even an RPG at all, what it is is a game where the developers mixed in so many elements of so many other game types that they ended up with some deformed child that is surprisingly brilliant. I think that a combination of ME1 and 2 would be about #8 on my favorite games ever list.
[SIZE=12px]"FOR THE GLORY OF MOTHER RUSSIA!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"FOR THE SWARM!!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"FOR CHAOS!!!!"[/size]
[SIZE=12px]"Its pretty good."[/size]

User avatar
aphasia
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 3:59 am
Contact:

Postby aphasia » Fri Feb 05, 2010 3:23 pm

I have to agree with you on that count (about ME2 not being and rpg) but a did allude to that conclusion in my last post. ME1 was after all a rpg and gamebanshee is a rpg resource site yes? i even went as far to say ME2 shouldn't even be a feature on this site.

there is no doubting ME1 has its problems. to be honest i hadn't completed ME until a few days ago. i'd stopped playing it over a year ago. i had to dig up my old save games to complete the last section of ME as i wanted to import my original character.

if i had to choose between the two, i'd choose neither and probably play dragon age: origins again.

i guess my point was ME had promise as a rpg that didn't quite deliver. ME2 looked to be that improvement i was looking for but turned out to be a completely different game. from that aspect it’s a disappointment.

if i'd picked up ME2 having never played ME1 or any other bioware game i might think differently. however considering biowares history of producing excellent rpgs, ME2 is a let down.