Mass Effect 1 may have the best combat in the series.

[Mikeyfell]

I have to disagree yet again. My first play-through was as a Sentinel. Those guys are OP cause you get the best of both worlds with none of the flaws. Sabotage+Lift+Throw=Laugh as your enemies either die of fall damage or are in a disabled heap on the other side of the room.

ME 1 Shotguns are amazing. Did you ever bother to put points in weapons masteries? I can one shot a Geth sniper from across the map, and I can send Geth destroyers flying.

What system are you playing on (I played all 3 on 360)
My sentinel with maxed out sabotage wouldn't do any more than a normal pistol shot.


When I played Soldier I got all the weapon skills maxed out, the pistols were the most efficient. they were only slightly weaker than shotguns and assault rifles with much better accuracy and much better range, The only down side to using snipers was the low rate of fire but 2 level X heat syncs would solve that problem.

I could never make any of the powers do anything useful and the every team mate was dead weight, Ashley and Garrus were the only 2 that wouldn't die every ten seconds so They were my main team for my insanity runs.
I found ME1's combat so insufferable that after I beat all the difficulties I switched to Casual (So I only played insanity with my soldier and my adept, and I played Veteran with my engineer, all mixed classes I played on casual and still couldn't make the powers be helpful.

 

[In Search of Username]

I don't hate the Mass Effect 1 combat as much as others, and it's certainly not enough to put me off the game (the first is still the best in the series to me) but whenever I play the first game I'm just turned off playing anything other than the soldier because none of the abilities seem more fun to me than just shooting stuff with an assault rifle. Which is generally a pretty bad sign when the game intends for you to use an array of abilities. No, for me, the later games had a lot more satisfying combat.

 

[Zeraki]

I could never make any of the powers do anything useful

Biotics were mostly just crowd control in the first game. At times they could be more useful for damage if you were a biotic and combined your powers with others. Having one character use lift then walking underneath the lifted enemies and using throw was always one of my favorite tactics. Especially in the battle of the Citadel when they can go flying away forever or just come crashing down and die from the impact. The highest difficulty I played on was hardcore though, so I don't know how effective the powers are/aren't on insanity.

 

[SadisticBrownie]

Nah, man. It was messy and imprecise as fuck, especially early in the game. However, once you got really strong, there was a certain joy in just stomping everything with biotics and never-overheating assault rifles.

 

[j0frenzy]

ME1 I had a gun that cool downed almost as fast as it could fire making it so that I had to try to make it overheat and the final boss only got one hit on me because a cut scene cut off my lift & throw juggling. Yeah, it was fun and varied to a certain degree, but balanced it was not.
I was rather found of the combat of ME3 in terms of mobility and firing, and the added depth to the leveling system was a welcomed change from ME2. I will admit I would have preferred a leveling system closer to 1's, but with actual combat closer to 3.

 

[Snotnarok]

Best combat? No, I'm playing through it now and I couldn't disagree more. It's clunky, unrefined and unbalanced.
The game seemed designed for the Soldier only, some enemies killing you in one hit otherwise and they take many. 2 & 3 were more balanced and polished.

In ME1 there wasn't even a point to the shops, you didn't need to buy a thing, it wasn't ever worth it. Then the mods had you constantly jumping into the clunky menus to change them, OR you just stuck with a generic option and only updated when you got a better one.

 

[00slash00]

No, Mass Effect 3 had the best combat, it was amazingly good. Mass Effect 1 automatically fails for not having the Vanguard's charge. Mass effect 1 had the best story though with Mass Effect 3 lagging behind because of that which shall not be named and then Mass Effect 2's crappy story coming in last.

i dont understand why everyone hates the story of mass effect 2. i personally found it to have the most interesting story of the series and the story of mass effect 1 interested me the least. basically mass effect 1, to me, is just the game i have to put up with in order to get to the vastly superior other games

.....What? There is pretty much no purpose in ME2's story, other than introducing characters that only make cameos in ME3, you could have skipped over the entire game and lost almost nothing. Its filler before they could get to the ending of the series with nothing of any real importance happening, I mean we learn about the collectors(a race we never heard of that I won't go into details about to avoid spoilers) and we work for Cerberus for a bit before breaking up with them before the third game which has no big connection to the third game except for a couple annoying mentions that seem more in there to make the second game not seem pointless.

Actually, everything in ME3 that relates to ME2 seems like its just there as a honorable mention to a game that just didn't have a purpose.

I agree that ME1's cover system was terrible, but it made run and gun gameplay necessary and I LOVE run and gun gameplay. I don't know why people are insulting the ME1 enemies, theres drones that rocket bomb you, thorian creepers that mob you, husks that run up to you and explode(I forgot about that), wall jumper geth, geth troopers, geth snipers, 2 different types of geth tanks, 3 different variety of gangsters, cerberus troopers with nasty skills, rachni, asari commandos, krogan troopers, thresher maw, varren, and while not enemies... I can shoot a decent range of animals on the planets for shits and giggles.

All that and the enemy AI was better than ME2, They used cover well and when you used cover, they actually FLANKED YOU! ME2 meanwhile, you use cover and they get out of cover and slowly walk towards you with a bulls eye on their face. Plus ME2 only have 3 merc factions each with about 2-3 different types and the collectors with husk, trooper, scion and awakened.... thats a fucking terrible amount of enemy variety.

ME1 did have a clunky inventory system, but weapon customization was great, with 2 different gun options and 1 ammo choice you could make a gun that worked towards what you actually wanted to use. Meanwhile ME2 had 2 of each weapon with no customization options and 1 extra for sniper, shotgun and assault of which you could pick one of them and were missable if you didn't grab them during the one mission you could of. Plus ME1 you can use all the guns no matter your class but your rubbish with them without training, ME2 you can use guns fine.... but you can only use more than the pistol or submachine gun on 3 classes. They also used the clip system really poorly making ammo drop reliant for long stretches which they did better in ME3 but I still prefer the cooldown system.

ME1 is infinitely stronger than ME2, with a stronger/better written cast, actual exploration, missions that were interesting and fun(though the side missions could of used more that 4 different rooms), and again.... a functional story that means something in the scope of the story.

I won't argue against ME3, it's a good mesh of the better points of ME1 & 2(with the exception of heat clips) that works pretty well and comes out very strong (except for that original ending )

wow, that was quite a rant. ill be honest, i mostly skimmed it (i dont mean any disrespect, it was just a lot) but if mass effect 2 was pointless filler, then i found the filler to be more interesting than the main story.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Seriously, I can't get enough of it.

Snipers were so fun in ME1.

I think a good deal of the combat was improved in ME2 and 3, but I really missed being a REAL sniper. ME1 was made for awesome sniper combat. ME2 was too geared towards close range combat (which is why ME2 and 3 has the most awesome Vanguard possible) to allow for proper sniping. Also, as much as I hated fighting in teh Mako, I LOVED getting out of the Mako and fighting on foot as a Sniper.

Also, it's hard to imagine something more fun than circle-strafing a Thresher Maw to death with Biotics and a pistol. ^^

ME 2 and 3 were great, and I like biotics in ME2 and 3 far better than Biotics in 1, but if you wanted to be a full-on Infiltrator Sniper, then ME 1 was the game to be in.

 

[Jfswift]

I've always been torn between the guns heat system in ME1 and the reloadable clips in the others.
The clips were nice for faster combat but I agree, the heat system added another element to the weapons. You couldn't risk firing the sniper rifle or shotgun too fast without frying it.

 

[Signa]

While I never got into ME1, I agree fully. When I saw ME2 had devolved into another generic TPS, I couldn't muster up any desire to continue ME1. Add in that ME3 is Origin only, and I'm just glad I never got to start a story that would have been pulling teeth to finish.

 

[FallenTraveler]

Mass Effect 2 had great combat, Mass Effect 3 was pretty awesome combat (in my opinion), Mass Effect 1 had awful combat that kept me from wanting to play the game.

So, I disagree with your opinion in many ways. I think that perhaps if they took ME3's combat and added in some of the RPG elements that you enjoyed, they would have a perfected system.

 

[Twilight_guy]

That's nice for you but most people I know, and apparently the devs, think that the combat wasn't very good. So they changed it. Too bad for you I guess.

 

[Invictusblade]

I've always been torn between the guns heat system in ME1 and the reloadable clips in the others.
The clips were nice for faster combat but I agree, the heat system added another element to the weapons. You couldn't risk firing the sniper rifle or shotgun too fast without frying it.

What I believe they should have done in both ME2&3 is have regenerating ammo in the currently used clip that can cool down after waiting a while.

The effects of that is that levels could have an reduced number of clips found on higher difficulty setting which will require smarter heat management, this effect could have been used in a horror style level with a single heat sink in the entire level.

 

[MetroidNut]

words

Didn't notice this for a few days. Anyway, in ME1, I saw Tali as walking exposition. No character, just explanations about the (admittedly very interesting) quarians. In Mass Effect 2, she manages to pick up a personality. And I thought adding more quarians to the later games was nice - it's still just one or two per world, tops, and seeing pilgrimages in progress makes the universe feel a little more alive.

As for daddy issues, eh, I can see where you'd get the idea, but I disagree. Between biological or cultural differences, and the uncertain length of the pilgrimage, it's impossible to say how much younger Tali is than Shepard; it's definitely implied that she's younger, but I always assumed she was more like quarian-25 than quarian-19. And, I mean, as far as family relationships go, I'd say almost all fathers are authority figures in some way. That doesn't mean any woman interested in an authority figure has daddy issues. Same with the timing - her father was killed not long before she enters a relationship, but that doesn't immediately mean daddy issues.

Tali did get a little insecure, sure, but that's reasonable character development, and fits in fairly well with what little characterization she got in the first game - that she's worried about living up to her people's expectations.

Regarding Garrus, I'm afraid I don't judge characters by the number of conversations I have with them. Garrus may not say as much on the Normandy as before, but both his recruitment and loyalty missions develop his character greatly - in Mass Effect 1, those four conversations are all of the "follow/ignore the law" variety. He wasn't totally blank the way Tali was, but he didn't become the tortured angel of justice we know and love until the sequel.

And the loyalty missions? While Mass Effect 1 did have optional, character-specific missions, they were all boring. Shoot up a few places, get one line of dialogue from Wrex/Garrus, return to the Normandy. The reason the sequel's loyalty missions are so praised isn't that ME2 invented character-specific sidequests, it's that ME2 did them incredibly well. The sequel's loyalty missions are diverse and provide ample character development. Sure, they're not really optional if you want the good endings, but who cares? They're the best part of the game, bar none.

 

[satsugaikaze]

Again, I want to reiterate that in terms of combat the first game is so fundamentally different I would rather not rate it as "best" or "worst" of the 3. Apples and oranges and what-not. People mentioned the run-and-gun gameplay of Mass Effect 1, which I personally enjoyed very much (whereas 2 turned the cover-based system into a mandatory crutch). I was very pleasantly surprised by the way 3's combat was much more forgiving in that aspect.
The other thing was specifically sniper rifles: 1 had the interesting aspect of being able to actually use sniper rifles at distances usually reserved for sniper rifles, especially in the planet-roaming sandboxes, despite the garbage cookie-cutter terrain-building.

I do enjoy comparing Mass Effect 3 and 2's combat, though, because imo 3 makes 2 look slow and clunky while still expanding on customisation options and character builds, improving on all fronts except for maybe the lolVanguard. Seriously, did someone in the thread say that 3's Vanguard was objectively better? Because imo they turned a great, balanced and tactical (you know, like how some RPGs can be) biotic power into an easily spammable biotic combinations with very little sense of calculation.
And when a game can consist of very little more than aiming with the mouse button and pressing 2 hotkeys, I think Bioware might have gotten something wrong on that front.

 

[kahlzun]

It was wonderful, i enjoyed it more than the others.
ME3 had a great story though

 

[Quellist]

I LOVED the combat and customization options in ME1, I loved the Rover, storywize sections, all in all I enjoyed the breezy "we are trying something new here and we're excited about it" feel of the game. All of which. Was sadly lost in ME2 and 3, in favor of safe, unimaginative. FPS mechanics.

Oddly it was the heatsinks that annoyed me the most, storywise it made no sense and by the end of ME1 my AR soldier could fire a sustained burst for ages and use an ability for instant cooldown which gave him an almost endless sustained fire, I felt ME2 kind of betrayed him

 

[deviltry]

One thing that is even better in ME1, is driving.


heu heu heu heu

 

[Little Duck]

Mass effect 1 had a loose un focused combat system. And I loved it for it.

It was exploitable, it always felt you were looking for another way around and it felt, I don't know how to describe it, I want to say real but it blatantly wasn't.

Mass effect 2 and 3 however felt like a video game. I guess it was how flying in flight simulator would feel compared to flying in halo. The two styles are achieving different things. I think 1 is more of an acquired taste and if you like it's flaws you'll find it the best (I certainly do). But if you dislike them, you'll hate the game.

 

[Netrigan]

I LOVED the combat and customization options in ME1, I loved the Rover, storywize sections, all in all I enjoyed the breezy "we are trying something new here and we're excited about it" feel of the game. All of which. Was sadly lost in ME2 and 3, in favor of safe, unimaginative. FPS mechanics.

Oddly it was the heatsinks that annoyed me the most, storywise it made no sense and by the end of ME1 my AR soldier could fire a sustained burst for ages and use an ability for instant cooldown which gave him an almost endless sustained fire, I felt ME2 kind of betrayed him

Which betrays the lack of thought they put into the system in the first game of what they knew was a series. In a game dependent on leveling up, how do you go up from GOD? If you have an assault rifle which provides endless sustained fire, then how do you upgrade that? By following the fairly standard RPG leveling up philosophy (in which every ounce of challenge must be eliminated from the game by the time you reach the final level), they leveled themselves into a narrative corner from which there was no logical escape.

They must strip Shepard of his godlike abilities and hilariously over-powered weapons or else the series ceases to be a challenge. And there is simply no logical reason to do either of those things when Shepard is painted as the last, best hope for the galaxy. "We know the Reaper threat is real and you've proved yourself a thousand times over... but it's time you gave back your aiming skills and take this level 1 pistol that can barely kill a mosquito.

When swapping out RPG leveling rules for shooter leveling rules, I just wish they had paid more attention to what makes a smart shooter, instead of going full-on Gears of War on us. The second game is tedious to replay thanks to the endless whack-a-mole scenarios.