wow, it was announced 2 years before it launched?
Seems pretty standard, how is that "wow"?
wow, it was announced 2 years before it launched?
It was kinda mediocre (how did they fuck the inventory system to much), but it offered an interesting mix of genres and a very peculiar atmosphere.
Too bad the sequels didn't expand ME1 gameplay systems and instead turned into boring space-corridors simulators.
Remaster ain't coming.
Breath deep and be free.
I am getting to that point but the lack of denial from Bioware and the fact there is a special Mass Effect Loot Crate being planned still give me hope.
I am getting to that point but the lack of denial from Bioware and the fact there is a special Mass Effect Loot Crate being planned still give me hope.
What are you talking about?
I'd say how the original Mass Effect managed to captivate me was through presenting a more personalised experience of galactic exploration. It wasn't the first game to feature system hopping by a long shot, and in reality navigating the galaxy map boiled down to clicking shit, but it's the concepts presented and the fact I controlled these from the perspective of a third person avatar rather than an entire ship or something that really sold the entire idea.
I can appreciate how some people loathed the pointlessness of the uncharted worlds, but it's through these (though not exclusively) that the aforementioned experience was rounded up for me. Even though 90% of the time there was nothing particularly interesting to do on these worlds, and their aesthetic design was barren and procedural heightmap-like, I'd never experienced a game where I was controlling my character on a star ship, selecting a world, watching a scene as I travel there, then down to the surface, and then controlling my little character just as I would any other third person game, marvelling at the skybox and barren nothingness.
Consistency within game mechanics and avatar control, coherently bridging the entire experience of "play" and how that relates to immersion, is something that really interests me in game design. How, for me, arguably rough presentation and ideas can be elevated significantly in crafting an immersing interactive experience by just existing verses excessively scaling back ideas in favour of presentation and production polish.
Like there's no doubt Mass Effect 2 and 3 have mostly far better combat missions on "Uncharted Worlds" due to the tighter encounter design and more varied level layouts, but they never managed to capture the sense of scale and "little person in a big universe" that the original did simply by having you land on a gigantic hunk of rocky nothingness and wander about.
That's the thing I'm most excited about for Andromeda, if they can recapture that.
I assume you know what look crate is.
https://www.lootcrate.com/masseffect
They has a special Fallout crate releasing in November around the time the game releases. Why do a Mass Effect crate when the next game is out in a year.
I'd say how the original Mass Effect managed to captivate me was through presenting a more personalised experience of galactic exploration. It wasn't the first game to feature system hopping by a long shot, and in reality navigating the galaxy map boiled down to clicking shit, but it's the concepts presented and the fact I controlled these from the perspective of a third person avatar rather than an entire ship or something that really sold the entire idea.
I can appreciate how some people loathed the pointlessness of the uncharted worlds, but it's through these (though not exclusively) that the aforementioned experience was rounded up for me. Even though 90% of the time there was nothing particularly interesting to do on these worlds, and their aesthetic design was barren and procedural heightmap-like, I'd never experienced a game where I was controlling my character on a star ship, selecting a world, watching a scene as I travel there, then down to the surface, and then controlling my little character just as I would any other third person game, marvelling at the skybox and barren nothingness.
Consistency within game mechanics and avatar control, coherently bridging the entire experience of "play" and how that relates to immersion, is something that really interests me in game design. How, for me, arguably rough presentation and ideas can be elevated significantly in crafting an immersing interactive experience by just existing verses excessively scaling back ideas in favour of presentation and production polish.
Like there's no doubt Mass Effect 2 and 3 have mostly far better combat missions on "Uncharted Worlds" due to the tighter encounter design and more varied level layouts, but they never managed to capture the sense of scale and "little person in a big universe" that the original did simply by having you land on a gigantic hunk of rocky nothingness and wander about.
That's the thing I'm most excited about for Andromeda, if they can recapture that.
I know these type of threads tend to be overwhelmingly positive, but I found Mass Effect to have laughably bad animation, clunky shooting, low image quality, and it was just all around not a very good game.
I never played the sequels, but from what I heard, they were actually somewhat worse.
I played this game so many damn hours. I visited every planet and drove the Mako(sp) 100% on every planet I could land on. It was such a fantastic and unique game. I loved the RPG elements better than the sequels, which still were good, but to me the original was the best.
Remaster ain't coming.
Breath deep and be free.
I just didn't know that.Seems pretty standard, how is that "wow"?
The things with Bioware is that they chase trends and are super quick to ditch non-mainstream mechanics.This. I dream about living in a parallel universe where all 3 Mass Effect games are as good as the first one. Same thing with Dragon Age. God.
I have never played mass effect
Launch Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqBpRJ7qgaM