Support NeoGAF

[Lostconfused]

How else could humanity gaining major influence be played out?

They got a seat on the council. They didn't suddenly become the lords and masters of the universe. They got a vote, great, they still need to convince two other members on whatever issue they are voting on. Humanities fleets are still not equal in size to Asari or Turian fleets. Nor do they have the economic influence of the volus. This isn't endgame, this is still the beginning.

 

[Kittonwy]

a zero value is greater than a negative value

That's like saying taking the bus is better than driving a shitty car, I disagree.

 

[KHarvey16]

Quite often, people agree with the popular opinion then speak up later. See: unanimous appraise for Mass Effect 2 vs. now. Even if it's different people, its just weird seeing everyone all up on it at first and then seeing the exact polar end of opinions much later.

It's because the people who liked it don't feel the need to have themselves heard. In the beginning people are excited and want to share information about their play-through or their experience. Afterward it shifts to people who want to complain.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

The fact that everytime I enter the inventary, the game asks me if I want to convert all this stuff into omnitool.

Do you mean omnigel?

The Omnitool is the thing infiltrators and engineers need for their tech powers.

 

[Diablohead]

Shepard accidently the earth.

 

[dejan]

Joke post?

I complete agree with him ... and so do many others who played both. They are just less vocal about it. If BioWare decides to go back to the formula of the first game it would be a huge step back in terms of gameplay ... which I guess is not that important to most of you guys.

 

[Kurtofan]

Do you mean omnigel?

The Omnitool is the thing infiltrators and engineers need for their tech powers.

Yeah that's what I meant.

 

[Patryn]

Quite often, people agree with the popular opinion then speak up later. See: unanimous appraise for Mass Effect 2 vs. now. Even if it's different people, its just weird seeing everyone all up on it at first and then seeing the exact polar end of opinions much later.

Dig up the ME2 story thread. You'll see that the same complaints you're seeing now existed within days of the release. It worked to concentrate all the criticisms in one place.

 

[Deleted member 30609]

That's like saying taking the bus is better than driving a shitty car, I disagree.

heh.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I complete agree with him ... and so do many others who played both. They are just less vocal about it. If BioWare decides to go back to the formula of the first game it would be a huge step back in terms of gameplay ... which I guess is not that important to most of you guys.

yes we don't care about gameplay we just liked these things for magical phantom reasons, purely to fuck with you, yes you

 

[MCD]

I am kinda regretting going paragon through most of my ME2 save then renegade in the end.

 

[8bit]

That was Jason Statham's cheaper, non-union equivalent.

Or as we call them in Britain, 'Cockneys'.

I think it was the doctor from Enterprise.

 

[itxaka]

I complete agree with him ... and so do many others who played both. They are just less vocal about it. If BioWare decides to go back to the formula of the first game it would be a huge step back in terms of gameplay ... which I guess is not that important to most of you guys.

Which formula? Having an actual choice of stats? Or inventory? Or planet exploration? Or almost seamless universe?

There is a lot of things that ME2 does better than ME1 but there is also a lot of things ME1 does better than ME2.

They just have to mix it correctly so we can have an awesome ME3

 

[dejan]

Which formula? Having an actual choice of stats? Or inventory? Or planet exploration? Or almost seamless universe?

Well, this time I know you're joking.

 

[Solo]

Prove me wrong.

You called my post about ME1 being superior "completely subjective" then proceeded to wrangle off a list of completely subjective thing you (incorrectly, tee hee) thought ME2 did better. Variety of missions? Oh fuck no. Variety of hubs? Oh fuck no. Variety of companions? Sure, by default though on account of having twice as many of them. Squad interaction? Felt the same in both games to me. No Mako? Yeah, thats a big fat MINUS for me, as it completely removed the sense of exploration and scope the first game had, in which the galaxy actually felt huge and intimidating rather than compartmentalized like in ME2.

The only, and I mean only, two areas in which ME2 is objectively better than ME1 are in the technical end of things, and in the gunplay end of things.

 

[itxaka]

Well, this time I know you're joking.

Would you care to expand please? It's impossible to debate this things without the help of both parts.

 

[MushroomSamba]

Quite often, people agree with the popular opinion then speak up later. See: unanimous appraise for Mass Effect 2 vs. now. Even if it's different people, its just weird seeing everyone all up on it at first and then seeing the exact polar end of opinions much later.

GAF is the only place I see people bitching about the game. Everybody else I talk to or know loves it. I didn't even realize hate for this game even existed before coming here.

Yeah, the probing stuff sucked, but jeez, this game does do much right.

 

[Patryn]

GAF is the only place I see people bitching about the game. Everybody else I talk to or know loves it. I didn't even realize hate for this game even existed before coming here.

Yeah, the probing stuff sucked, but jeez, this game does do much right.

From what I've heard, the Bioware forums are also not all hugs and puppies for the game.

 

[Kittonwy]

I complete agree with him ... and so do many others who played both. They are just less vocal about it. If BioWare decides to go back to the formula of the first game it would be a huge step back in terms of gameplay ... which I guess is not that important to most of you guys.

It's not THAT hard to add some RPG elements to the shooting without resorting to the fucking dice roll. They can make it so that as you upgrade a weapon, the reticle becomes noticibly more accurate, and the gun has noticibly less recoil, upping the damage, unlocking additional fire modes that the player can customize so every player can have a unique set of weapons and secondary fire modes, everything from health recovery to sprint/stamina can be improved, and these are things the player can tangibly experience, that's something that can make the player feel like a badass.

The current progression system lets you go from, for example, causing 500 damage to causing 650 damage, or some sort of minor increase in area of effect, it's not the kind of difference that the player can readily detect. Something like incinerate can upgrade from 1 fireball to 2 fireballs to 3 fireballs, the same approach can be used for just about every ability in the game, they're still thinking in terms of stats when you can hide all the stats in the background and let the player visually see the difference.

 

[kazinova]

My monthly check to make sure that 99% of gaffers have absolutely no clue what their talking about has been completed. Thank you ten page unfounded speculative bullshit thread.

I may now ignore GAF for another month.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

GAF is the only place I see people bitching about the game. Everybody else I talk to or know loves it. I didn't even realize hate for this game even existed before coming here.

Yeah, the probing stuff sucked, but jeez, this game does do much right.

I don't think people hate it, they're just disappointed that rather than fixing or refining the first game, they jettisoned a lot of cool stuff and took it to a different direction.

 

[dejan]

Would you care to expand please? It's impossible to debate this things without the help of both parts.

The last time I played a game with those features you listed was about 1990. The game is called Starflight 2 ... look it up. I thought we were talking about Mass Effect.

 

[Kinyou]

You called my post about ME1 being superior "completely subjective" then proceeded to wrangle off a list of completely subjective thing you (incorrectly, tee hee) thought ME2 did better. Variety of missions? Oh fuck no. Variety of hubs? Oh fuck no. Variety of companions? Sure, by default though on account of having twice as many of them. Squad interaction? Felt the same in both games to me. No Mako? Yeah, thats a big fat MINUS for me, as it completely removed the sense of exploration and scope the first game had, in which the galaxy actually felt huge and intimidating rather than compartmentalized like in ME2.

The only, and I mean only, two areas in which ME2 is objectively better than ME1 are in the technical end of things, and in the gunplay end of things.

(Ignoring the other points for the moment).

You can't be serious about that one, can you?

If you played through ME1 and did every little side mission and then played through ME2 and again did every little side mission you must notice the HUGE difference.

Just compare for example the side mission in ME1 in which you were looking for Wrex's old family armor, with the mission about Thane and his son from ME2.

 

[Patryn]

(Ignoring the other points for the moment).

You can't be serious about that one, can you?

If you played through ME1 and did every little side mission and then played through ME2 and again did every little side mission you must notice the HUGE difference.

Just compare for example the side mission in ME1 in which you were looking for Wrex's old family armor, with the mission about Thane and his son from ME2.

One of those is a core mission. One of those is a side mission. I'm not quite sure you can compare the two.

 

[Fimbulvetr]

I don't think people hate it, they're just disappointed that rather than fixing or refining the first game, they jettisoned a lot of cool stuff and took it to a different direction.

SHHHHHHH you are only supposed to completely hate something or fap over it. Don't you know anything?

 

[enzo_gt]

I don't have a problem with people being critical about ME2, I'm just saying the difference in opinions I saw was odd. And considering, for fear of spoilers, I never entered ME2 thread (cause I haven't played ME2 yet), I always saw game recommendation or GotY threads that were unanimous appraisal for ME2, unlike other great, high caliber games that had their fair share of dissenters or those who spoke out against the popular opinion.

 

[itxaka]

The last time I played a game with those features you listed was about 1990. The game is called Starflight 2 ... look it up. I thought we were talking about Mass Effect.

Way to say nothing. No game in the last 20 years had inventory, stats and seamless world? Try harder man.

 

[darkpaladinmfc]

One of those is a core mission. One of those is a side mission. I'm not quite sure you can compare the two.

Actually, both of them are optional.

 

[Solo]

One of those is a core mission. One of those is a side mission. I'm not quite sure you can compare the two.

Bingo bango. ME2 has no main storyline. The closest it gets are the loyalty missions, and even then, all those outside of Thane's and Samara's are of the "go here, shoot that" variety.

 

[Chinner]

(Ignoring the other points for the moment).

You can't be serious about that one, can you?

If you played through ME1 and did every little side mission and then played through ME2 and again did every little side mission you must notice the HUGE difference.

Just compare for example the side mission in ME1 in which you were looking for Wrex's old family armor, with the mission about Thane and his son from ME2.

nope sorry. bit insulting to suggest that solo hasn't played the game when he obviously has.

this is what solos complaint is.

in me1, the side quests were quite in-depth and had alot of variety. some of them built upon others but generally the majority of them had a plot to them. tackling Cerberus, the a.i, the guy on life support, and so on. they managed to roll exploration, combat and plot into one nice package. sure, there was gameplay and repetition issues, but the main idea behind them was correct.

in me2, you search a planet, find a beacon, and you go down and kill some stuff for about 10 minutes and leave. its streamlined, gives you no plot or motivation, its boring, doesn't extend the universe and it lacks the exploration and freedom that me1 had.

edit: putting aside that you compared a main mission with a side quest.

 

[Solo]

Well put, friend-o

 

[brandonh83]

That was my problem with Mass Effect 2 as well. And I really hated Ashley's implementation, or lack thereof.

 

[Always-honest]

Resistance: Fall of Sheppard.

Fantastic fucking trailer though!

:lol for a second there i thought i clicked a wrong link.

 

[tokkun]

edit: putting aside that you compared a main mission with a side quest.

How exactly is it a "main mission"? Both are optional side quests for party members. The only real difference is that, unlike ME1's sidequests, it has real consequences.

 

[Hasphat'sAnts]

There were two side quest chains in ME2, and both of which comes out to be much better than the stuff we were presented with in ME1 though.

But yes, in general I prefer the sidequest chains like Kahoku or Helena Blake where there's a plot point that's bigger than an insular 20 minute shooting sequence.

 

[∀ Narayan]

nope sorry. bit insulting to suggest that solo hasn't played the game when he obviously has.

this is what solos complaint is.

in me1, the side quests were quite in-depth and had alot of variety. some of them built upon others but generally the majority of them had a plot to them. tackling Cerberus, the a.i, the guy on life support, and so on. they managed to roll exploration, combat and plot into one nice package. sure, there was gameplay and repetition issues, but the main idea behind them was correct.

in me2, you search a planet, find a beacon, and you go down and kill some stuff for about 10 minutes and leave. its streamlined, gives you no plot or motivation, its boring, doesn't extend the universe and it lacks the exploration and freedom that me1 had.

edit: putting aside that you compared a main mission with a side quest.

It would be nice to get a blend of the two. I enjoyed ME2's quests because they were unique, and that kept them from getting old, but at the same time I missed the amount of freedom that was available in ME1. I hated using the Mako, though.

 

[Chinner]

How exactly is it a "main mission"? Both are optional side quests for party members. The only real difference is that, unlike ME1's sidequests, it has real consequences.

well because it is a main mission because it relates to the plot (~lol~) directly and the game itself actually classes it as a main mission?

 

[Solo]

How exactly is it a "main mission"?

Because if you don't do it, what does ME2 offer? Just jump through the mass relay and beat the game in about 5 hours flat? Because there isn't shit to do in ME2 otherwise.

Loyalty quests ARE ME2's main quest.

 

[Kurtofan]

You called my post about ME1 being superior "completely subjective" then proceeded to wrangle off a list of completely subjective thing you (incorrectly) thought ME2 did better. Variety of missions? Oh fuck no. Variety of hubs? Oh fuck no. Variety of companions? Sure, by default though on account of having twice as many of them. Squad interaction? Felt the same in both games to me. No Mako? Yeah, thats a big fat MINUS for me, as it completely removed the sense of exploration and scope the first game had, in which the galaxy actually felt huge and intimidating rather than compartmentalized like in ME2.

The only, and I mean only, two areas in which ME2 is objectively better than ME1 are in the technical end of things, and in the gunplay end of things.

Variety of missions?

Many more dossier and loyalty missions that involves the team with a lot of different situations.
There aren't many "main plot" missions in ME1, but I agree that they are better then ME2's, except for the endgame which is way more tense in ME2.

Variety of hubs?

Citadel,Illium,Omega and Tuchanka to a lesser extent beats Citadel.

Squad interaction?

If you don't see it I don't know what to say,try to talk to them more than once?

No Mako? Yeah, thats a big fat MINUS for me, as it completely removed the sense of exploration and scope the first game had, in which the galaxy actually felt huge and intimidating rather than compartmentalized like in ME2.

That's called subjective: a lot of people hated the MAKO, and lunar landscape don't feel anything but barren to me.

in the gunplay end of things

Seems pretty important to me.

I want to add that still I love Mass Effect 1 even with its flaws.

 

[Zen]

Yep, when GAF turns into this kind of pack of sheep its kinda disappointing people can't just say how they feel.

People can say how they feel, just don't be surprised when people also say how they feel. GAF having an overall positive or negative perception on something doesn't equal sheep. The ME2 Story thread was a hotbed of backlash when the game came out. That doesn't mean that they're sheep because you disagree with the prevalent opinion.

 

[Arjen]

Neogaf's thoughts on Mass Effect 2

Perfect :lol

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I can see both sides on this.

I liked the Mako missions in the first. I liked the little stories you got from each of those identically designed areas. But I also liked the smaller more individual places in ME2.

ME2 is a much better shooter, but an infinitely more limited RPG. Mass Effect has massive amounts of loot to be gettin'. I enjoyed that quite a bit even with the terrible inventory system.

Overall ME1 is still my favored between them, but I think ME2 has more interesting characters, much better and consistent visuals on the 360, and a much more concise design. More focus on making it a streamlined experience.

It does what it does well... but honestly if it wasn't for name and a few conventions between the two you could be talking about entirely different games. One is a 3rd person RPG/shooter, the other a 3rd person shooter with minimal RPG elements.

 

[Zen]

Perfect :lol

Pretty fucking awesome, but hindsight is 20/20. I know I was initially really impressed by the very beginning and then the final mission, and then I sat back and thought about the game as a whole and realized that I'd actually been unsatisfied for like 90% of it. :lol

 

[Kinyou]

nope sorry. bit insulting to suggest that solo hasn't played the game when he obviously has.

Was never trying to suggest that, if I had meant that I would've said: "If you had played through..." but you're right it was a bit unclear

this is what solos complaint is.


in me1, the side quests were quite in-depth and had alot of variety. some of them built upon others but generally the majority of them had a plot to them. tackling Cerberus, the a.i, the guy on life support, and so on. they managed to roll exploration, combat and plot into one nice package. sure, there was gameplay and repetition issues, but the main idea behind them was correct.

in me2, you search a planet, find a beacon, and you go down and kill some stuff for about 10 minutes and leave. its streamlined, gives you no plot or motivation, its boring, doesn't extend the universe and it lacks the exploration and freedom that me1 had.

edit: putting aside that you compared a main mission with a side quest.

(Ok, I notice the mistake of choosing a core mission (still it's optional)).

Well granted if you look at the beacon missions from ME2, they were boring and basically just a "killfest". But that were the side missions of ME1 just as well (find geth activities), and that what might have been gained by extra story was lost by the almost offending reuse of environments ( 2 stages for outposts and 1 for spaceships).

So i guess you can't say they were better in ME2 but you also can't say that they were better in ME1.

 

[Discotheque]

I wasn't expecting much of a deep RPG out of this series really. I was looking to Dragon Age to provide me with that from Bioware...:/

The thing that annoyed me the most out of Mass Effect 2 was just the lack of any plot development. 90 percent of the game consisted of you finding all these companions and doing their quests. And there still isn't much character development among many of them.

I hope ME3 keeps the companions you had in ME2, except maybe kill that Grunt guy and bring back Wrex or something. That way we can actually focus on a main quest finally.

 

[Arjen]

Only thing's Mass Effect 1 did better was the Main story (which was pretty short)
Sidequest, squad interaction and gameplay were much better in 2.
I replayed 1 a couple months ago and the combat and inventory is so awfull that if i didn't know it was a great story to relive i probaly would've stopped playing.

 

[Solo]

I hope ME3 keeps the companions you had in ME2, except maybe kill that Grunt guy and bring back Wrex or something.

Hmmm... yeah, about that.... I might've killed him on Virmire....

 

[Chinner]

So i guess you can't say they were better in ME2 but you also can't say that they were better in ME1.

i agree. mass effect had an ambitious idea but stumbled, while mass effect 2 scaled it back and achieved it, but at the expense of the end result not being that great from the original idea.

that's whats annoying, me1 had a ton of well known issues that me2 could of fixed, but bioware just threw it all out and did something completely else.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Only thing's Mass Effect 1 did better was the Main story (which was pretty short)
Sidequest, squad interaction and gameplay were much better in 2.
I replayed 1 a couple months ago and the combat and inventory is so awfull that if i didn't know it was a great story to relive i probaly would've stopped playing.

That's where we differ. I'd just check my dupes ever couple of hours and omnigel that shit.

I put hundreds of hours into that game though.:lol

 

[Wiggum2007]

I miss those jumpy wall geth from the first game.

....I'm probably the only one.