Mass Effect 2: What's the big deal?

[Xan Krieger]

My sincerest apologies if this comes off as a bit messy, or I posted it in the wrong place or anything like that. It's past midnight and I just wanted to vent about this somewhere.

(Contains spoilers for ME1 and about the first hour or so of ME2)

So a bit of context: Last week I finally got round to picking up the Mass Effect trilogy off the PSN. I'd heard great things about the games, and figured it was about time I played them.

The first game had me instantly hooked. The world-buiding, the characters, the gameplay, it was all top notch (Except for the slightly clunky cover system, but I never really needed to use cover anyway). It was a fun sci-fi adventure with some great darker moments to help keep the stakes high. (Virmire, anyone?). And most of all, I really felt that my choices mattered. I chose to save Kaidan instead of Ashley. I chose to have the Alliance fleet save the Citadel Council. Everything Shepard did felt like my decision.

Having heard great things of the second game, I couldn't wait to move on to it. After all, if I liked the first game so much, obviously the universally acclaimed second game would be even better, right?

After playing for a bit, I can't help but notice that the game is a bit... Darker. People are swearing more, there's more blood, that kind of thing. Bit of a major tone shift from the first game. And of course, there's Cerberus. What. The. Hell.

So... Why exactly is the game forcing me to side with the human-supremacist terrorist organisation? I mean, I kinda spent a fair portion of the last game fighting these guys. Sure, you brought me back to life and built a new Normandy. That's nice. I still don't like you, and I'd very much like to turn you over to the Council.

Speaking of the Council, what the hell happened to them? I mean, sure, they were never exactly as helpful as the could have been, but they were still reasonable. They didn't do anything about Saren until they had reasonable proof. They didn't send a fleet after him for good reasons Here, they just come off as idiots. For Christ's sake, I freaking saved your lives, the least you could do is believe me when I tell you who it was that almost killed you. I suppose this is supposed to make me sympathise with Cerberus, but honestly, it just feels cheap.

And of course, the crew members. Can I just toss them all out into the vacuum of space? Except for Jacob I suppose. Jacob's alright. Everyone else seems to be a psychopath of some variety. (So far I have Miranda, Jacob, the Salarian doctor guy, the thief woman and that guy who's name begins with a Z. Zaedd, I think? You pick him up on Omega.Which reminds me, why the hell am I having a nice, civil conversation with him while he's beating up that unarmed Batarian guy? Can I not at least ask him stop or something? Doesn't exactly help me feel very heroic.)

I could talk some more about it, like how the new level up system is too restrictive, how the new equipment selection manages to be even more clumsy than in the first game, how the combat seems to have turned into generic cover shooting, etc but I think you get the general idea.

TLDR: Why does everyone say this is the best Mass Effect game? I honestly want to know.

EDIT: Also, you know what's really starting to bug me? People going "Shepard! Why are you working with Cerberus? I thought you were a good guy!" and me having no option to agree with them in the slightest. I swear, I could make a drinking game out of this.

"I chose to save Kaidan instead of Ashley. "
Well so much for romance unless you were playing a female shepard or are into aliens which as your friendly warhammer 40,000 commissar would point is extra heresy.

"So... Why exactly is the game forcing me to side with the human-supremacist terrorist organisation? I mean, I kinda spent a fair portion of the last game fighting these guys. Sure, you brought me back to life and built a new Normandy. That's nice. I still don't like you, and I'd very much like to turn you over to the Council. "
It's worth remembering they have an AI in your ship. "I'm afraid I can't let you do that Dave" *shuts off life support* Also your implants that they installed. I wouldn't have put it past them to monitor everything and have a shut off switch for your life.

"Speaking of the Council, what the hell happened to them? I mean, sure, they were never exactly as helpful as the could have been, but they were still reasonable. They didn't do anything about Saren until they had reasonable proof. They didn't send a fleet after him for good reasons Here, they just come off as idiots. For Christ's sake, I freaking saved your lives, the least you could do is believe me when I tell you who it was that almost killed you. I suppose this is supposed to make me sympathise with Cerberus, but honestly, it just feels cheap."
I think they were being ignorant to prevent a mass panic, just deny it as long as possible, hope it goes away, don't cause planets to fall just due to fear, that kind of thing.

"Which reminds me, why the hell am I having a nice, civil conversation with him while he's beating up that unarmed Batarian guy?"
Because batarians suck ass? They have ever since they lost a war with us, bunch of anti-human jerks.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Spoiler

My sincerest apologies if this comes off as a bit messy, or I posted it in the wrong place or anything like that. It's past midnight and I just wanted to vent about this somewhere.

(Contains spoilers for ME1 and about the first hour or so of ME2)

So a bit of context: Last week I finally got round to picking up the Mass Effect trilogy off the PSN. I'd heard great things about the games, and figured it was about time I played them.

The first game had me instantly hooked. The world-buiding, the characters, the gameplay, it was all top notch (Except for the slightly clunky cover system, but I never really needed to use cover anyway). It was a fun sci-fi adventure with some great darker moments to help keep the stakes high. (Virmire, anyone?). And most of all, I really felt that my choices mattered. I chose to save Kaidan instead of Ashley. I chose to have the Alliance fleet save the Citadel Council. Everything Shepard did felt like my decision.

Having heard great things of the second game, I couldn't wait to move on to it. After all, if I liked the first game so much, obviously the universally acclaimed second game would be even better, right?

After playing for a bit, I can't help but notice that the game is a bit... Darker. People are swearing more, there's more blood, that kind of thing. Bit of a major tone shift from the first game. And of course, there's Cerberus. What. The. Hell.

So... Why exactly is the game forcing me to side with the human-supremacist terrorist organisation? I mean, I kinda spent a fair portion of the last game fighting these guys. Sure, you brought me back to life and built a new Normandy. That's nice. I still don't like you, and I'd very much like to turn you over to the Council.

Speaking of the Council, what the hell happened to them? I mean, sure, they were never exactly as helpful as the could have been, but they were still reasonable. They didn't do anything about Saren until they had reasonable proof. They didn't send a fleet after him for good reasons Here, they just come off as idiots. For Christ's sake, I freaking saved your lives, the least you could do is believe me when I tell you who it was that almost killed you. I suppose this is supposed to make me sympathise with Cerberus, but honestly, it just feels cheap.

And of course, the crew members. Can I just toss them all out into the vacuum of space? Except for Jacob I suppose. Jacob's alright. Everyone else seems to be a psychopath of some variety. (So far I have Miranda, Jacob, the Salarian doctor guy, the thief woman and that guy who's name begins with a Z. Zaedd, I think? You pick him up on Omega.Which reminds me, why the hell am I having a nice, civil conversation with him while he's beating up that unarmed Batarian guy? Can I not at least ask him stop or something? Doesn't exactly help me feel very heroic.)

I could talk some more about it, like how the new level up system is too restrictive, how the new equipment selection manages to be even more clumsy than in the first game, how the combat seems to have turned into generic cover shooting, etc but I think you get the general idea.

TLDR: Why does everyone say this is the best Mass Effect game? I honestly want to know.

EDIT: Also, you know what's really starting to bug me? People going "Shepard! Why are you working with Cerberus? I thought you were a good guy!" and me having no option to agree with them in the slightest. I swear, I could make a drinking game out of this.

I recommend a LP from Shamus Young, you'll find quite a bit in common with your opinion.

here's the playlist, if you're interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnojMjzn8Xg&list=PL3D99C79C77955FA5


I'm of a similar opinion to you, but I really like Mordin.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Basically they had no idea what they were doing and made it up as they went along.

Spoilers for ME1 and the start of ME2:

Spoiler

I mean think about the Collector ship that destroys the SR1. Why did Sovereign go to all the hassle of tricking the Geth/Saren into doing his bidding when one single Collector ship could've done much the same thing in stopping Shepard.

Spoiler

ME2 cutscene Joker tends to really suck at flying space ships, either that or he wants to give the slow enemy with the single forward facing gun a fair chance to hit.

Also, he listens to Shepard's insane space combat orders...

"Get in close and finish them off."

I don't think distance affects damage in space. Then again, space battle's are close dog fights in space despite what the codex says.

 

[pspman45]

Mass Effect was a fairly generic RPG in terms of narrative that I felt was held together mostly by the well made sci-fi setting
Mass Effect 2 was more about the moral gray zone, like working with whoever was necessary to do an impossible mission being backed by terrorists and being turned away from "civilization" You got to see that the universe of Mass Effect was actually kind of shitty, especially in the terminus systems. Worlds were run by crooks and mercenaries, you realized that the bad guys from the first game were actually a conflicted people trying to survive instead of just evil robots. I felt like it broke the mold of Mass Effect in a way I wasn't quite expecting, and it was a welcome change for me.

 

[Trunkage]

Yeah, the first was a space opera with large chunks of the game a direct copy and paste. The second one was a cross between Oceans 11 and Blade Runner. The third was a last stand feel like Saving Private Ryan. The second one didn't feel like there was any threat - Sovereign was intimidating and a clear threat to the galaxy The Fleet of Reapers was definitely the same. But the Collectors affected a few worlds, yes a common race to Shep, but a Paragon Shep fought for all. ME2 was terrible at creating a sense of dread and possible defeat - even the suicide mission was clearly totally achievable. The world (galaxy?) building from ME1 was great, but not really expanded in 2. Which is funny as you are mostly going to a separate part of the galaxy in 2. ME3 was great at team mates interacting. You find them everywhere, cracking jokes or bragging to each other. That was an awesome touch.

The whole ME trilogy is a case of decisions not mattering. There are no important decisions, they all get retconned somehow because... reasons (probably cost too much to create new and separate scenarios for branching choices. Nothing angered me more that the total story of the Rachnii - utterly pointless). It also didn't deal with the fact that the bad guys fly and you do not. The first and biggest showing of this is Saren - how would defeating him affect Sovereign at all (I mean killing Saren seem to negatively affect Sovereign). Sovereign is the one in control and letting go of that control would drain LESS resources, causing him to fight harder. It also didn't deal with being an RPG very well. ME1 system was great - when you put points into a weapon, it affected how you fired. You put it into a power, it was gradually affected too. It was a gradual shift. But where do you go once you are at the top of your game? Yeah you could reset everything like dying in number two and rebuilding from the start... But no, they changed the system. Why wouldn't this system be available from the start? I loved how ME3 evolved the powers and had special effects. Many of the weapons developed special affects too. Why wouldn't these be available from the start? I think all three fail in this regard as there was no continuity.

WHY was the heat system changed? I love the tactical implications that system had on you. I know all those other reason for changing it, but it made ME2 gunplay boring. The heavy weapons were great from ME2 though. As previously stated ME3 evolved their weapons.

Moridin is my favourite character from the series. You might have to wait for it.

I do have to say that there were two scenarios from ME2 that are my favourite from the series. The suicide mission is great. Finally I have a reason for team mates! Why did I bother collecting team mates when I can only use two? Why would only two come anyway? The best goes to Horizon. Too much heat from the sun causing your shields to overload, limited cover and its the only time you see a colossus in ME2 (without DLC). The scenarios were much better in 2, diminishing in 3 and worst in 1.

Story-wise ME1 and 3 are at a similar level. Both endings were disappointing. I was hoping for some way to actually affect Sovereign but instead I fought Saren. I was hoping for Coriana 6 for ME3 but it was more like Independence Day. They had some great pivotal missions, more so in ME3. But ME3 had a GOD awful TIM underling. I would have preferred Cerebus seemingly fighting with for most of the time in ME3 instead against you from start. You don't (re-)attract employees (especially heroes) with killing civilians. Also, why kill most of those civilians? I'm pro-humanity by killing humans! ME1 small connection between missions, ME2 had almost none, and ME3 had many.

In all ME1 best RPG elements, story and gunplay. ME2 had the best individual missions, best new teammate, best heavy weapons and the only one with a mission without Shep. ME3 had the best cover system, connection between missions, scale of epicness, guns, evolution at later stage of power levels, development of relationship especially between other characters. Its depends on your preference but I would suggest finishing, me its a tie between 1 and 3. There is nothing like it around ATM.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Well. If everyone loved ME 2, I'm not everyone.

Its been a few years now, so its not fresh in my mind.

Its the game that made me realise my choices didn't matter. Sort out the crews baggage missions, upgrade the ship, almost guaranteed final mission survival.
Kill Wrex in ME1, so what? different voice actor and character model, zero effect on your Shep.

Onto ME3. I played on PC, where as ME1 I played on 360. So im unsure if this is why this happened;
I met the Arachni. And my Shep had no idea who they were. Surely the cannon of ME means I either saved or killed them.
Did any of the characters who could have died in ME2 effect ME3? Not as far as I could tell.

ME1 had a Lovecraftian enemy, ME 2&3 over explained the Reapers, and with that explanation they were nowhere near as intersting to me.
what happened to the ammo, zero explanation given to a galaxy wide change.
ME1 had a 80s gritty scifi homage. ME2&3 went to modern shooter story telling style.
And I missed the numbers management. Whether armour with 0.5% improvement in one field is worth the 1% loss in another field.

but thats just me, BW got me invested in one thing with ME1, and changed direction with ME2

EDIT I loved Mordin

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

Basically they had no idea what they were doing and made it up as they went along.

Spoilers for ME1 and the start of ME2:

Spoiler

I mean think about the Collector ship that destroys the SR1. Why did Sovereign go to all the hassle of tricking the Geth/Saren into doing his bidding when one single Collector ship could've done much the same thing in stopping Shepard.

Spoiler

ME2 cutscene Joker tends to really suck at flying space ships, either that or he wants to give the slow enemy with the single forward facing gun a fair chance to hit.

Also, he listens to Shepard's insane space combat orders...

"Get in close and finish them off."

I don't think distance affects damage in space. Then again, space battle's are close dog fights in space despite what the codex says.

Everyone on the "good" side is ridiculously incompetent in cutscenes, Shepherd most of all (WHY ARE YOU USING A PISTOL THAT DOESN'T EXIST?!... maybe that explains why you can't hit anything with it!) The only exception is probably Thanes cutscene karate.

 

[jklinders]

On the whole Reapers thing, there are a lot of reasons why it makes a lot of sense for the council to not acknowledge the threat. The first thing is that the council doesn't like Shepard, although they dislike him less if he saved them. Like it or not, the council only made Shepard a Specter because they had their backs against a wall and it was the best (politically speaking) solution for them at the time. Additionally, there was a lot of information that you (the viewer) has that the Council didn't. While you saw all of the information about the Reapers as the player, all that the council saw was a Geth attack led by a traitor in a massive capital ship. Given that they had next to no knowledge of the Geth, this assumption is extremely logical to them. Furthermore, the council has a reason to believe that Shepard is at least a bit unstable. Pretty much every background except for spacer/warhero garentees that Shep has suffered at least one major trauma, and that is before he was exposed to the broken alien machine which messed around inside his head. Also considering many of the other choices that Shepard can make. To them, when the options are that an ancient race of giant spaceships manipulates galatic evolution and expansion for unknown cullings, or that the potentially mentally unstable soldier bought Saren's propaganda, they are likely going to go with option B.

The Cerberus thing also makes some sense, although some of the reactions could have been written better. From the start of the game, Shepard has no choice but to go along with Cerberus. He wakes up in a crippled space-station filled with rampaging mechs and is given a chance to take a seat on the last boat off. From there, his options are basically "Go along with it, look for an opportunity out while fighting the collectors" or "spend an excessive amount of time waiting around hoping to get a ship, a crew, and some weapons to effectively do the same thing". I agree that there should have been more "show you aren't happy about it" options, but realistically speaking they did well enough, and as soon as you get the chance to escape Cerberus, you have the option to (Shep couldn't leave even though he had the crew's loyalty because EDI still had Cerberus loyalty locks. When those are lifted you pretty much B-Line for the collector homeworld, and leave after that mission). It could have been written better, but the premise itself is not unbelievable.

I was saying pretty much this on the Bioware forums after the game came out. From the Council's perspective Shepard probably looked nuts. I actually facepalmed in the first game when at the trial for Saren, Anderson insisted on mentioning Shepard's beacon vision. Love him or hate him, SAren had a point when he said "how am I supposed to defend myself from someone's dream evidence?" I mean, WTF did Shepard's fever dream have to do with Saren's guilt or innocence?

Whenever Shep talked about the Reapers there seemed to be an edge of lunacy about him. He only really had full data corroborating what he had always said at the end of the second game. Making his being thrown under the bus seem a little stupid but necessary for placating the Batarians at least until they got eaten.

nothing the Council did in the first 2 games was anything as stupid as the Asari hiding their beacon on Thessia until the Reapers had already ruined their shit. Nice job breaking it you Mary Sue bitches. They used that beacon to pretend they were superior to everyone for 2000 years. When the entire galaxy is dying around them they never thought once, "hey maybe we should share?" Fuck them, they nearly burned the galaxy for their arrogance.

 

[stroopwafel]

Mass Effect 2 was the first ME game I played and I really loved that game. The whole look and feel reminded me of some kind of 80's sci-fi movie. The story I found nothing particularly special but it set a very suspenseful mood and actually took a backseat to the truly excellent characterization. There was just such depth to these characters that really shows how cleverly written they were. Espescially Mordin. And there was a lot of mystery and ambiguity about the Reaper threat that I really liked.

Mass Effect 3 was alright I guess. I never really got that invested in the story that the ending ruined it for me, but the entire game just didn't really 'click' with me as the previous one. The gameplay was a bit better, though it was already pretty good. The story just didn't really do it for me and the whole explanation about the Reapers was just ridiculous. I wish they just left a touch of mystery about their purpose and origins. Also Mordin, my favorite character of ME2, suddenly turned into a goody-2-shoes. Everything about his character just seemed incongruent with ME2, no matter how he might have seen 'the error of his ways'. He became from someone applying extreme logic to everything to becoming an emotional sob. Just poor writing if you ask me.

I never played ME1 b/c I much prefer third person shooters and this game seemed to be more the RPG. Also I'd rather replay ME2 at some time.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Spoiler

"Get in close and finish them off."

I don't think distance affects damage in space. Then again, space battle's are close dog fights in space despite what the codex says.

Spoiler

Shepard only says that if you don't have the thanix cannon upgrade installed.


Without that upgrade, the Normandy has to get in close to use its conventional weapons to attack the collector ship.

The collector ship is using a thanix cannon of its own. And if the Normandy doesn't have one, the only way to fight back is to "get in close". (Presumably the basic 'default' weapon is only accurate at close range)

Spoiler

He still says it, even with the cannon.


At 1:09

On a side note, I've never heard Shepard say, "Get in close, point blank! Right down their throat!"

That was new to me.

 

[TheRookie8]

People liked the squad in Mass Effect 2. The idea that your forming a squad of the most dangerous and volatile individuals in the galaxy was a neat concept, and a huge part of the game's charm...though admittedly not very practical from a rational standpoint. Still, these will be the characters you love when finishing the game and moving on to the third.

The game has a bit more polish than the previous installment, but it does merely act as a buffer between the first and the third. Some love it for an offshoot story with interesting characters, other dislike it because it introduces questionable plot lines and detracts from the main conflict.

Oh, and as for Jacob...best not to romance him, lest you lose respect for him. It's...awkward.

 

[Edhellen]

TLDR: Why does everyone say this is the best Mass Effect game? I honestly want to know.

They don't. The things you're complaining about are the things *everyone* hates about ME2. I think it's a good game in spite of this, and there are a few improvements over what ME1 was doing: The companions especially in ME2 are, I think, a lot better, and the shooting mechanics are more tolerable if still not very good. But overall, it represents several huge steps backward: What with the complete removal of the open-ended exploration elements, the overall shift in tone (which comes to a head in ME3 where it stops even trying to be a real science fiction story), the terrible Collectors as villains, and of course the horrible, horrible railroading with your forced alliance with Cerberus. The ending even pissed me off more than ME3's ending did.

That said, most of the awful is concentrated into about 2 hours of content (the beginning, the end, and a few pieces in the middle) in a 20-hour game: Those other ~18 hours of ME2 are pretty enjoyable. Keep on playing, you're through the worst of it for a while.

 

[Mikejames]

The Reaper conflict's less prevalent in ME2, but its strength comes from the exploring your crew. Garrus was a standard rookie cop in the first game, and Tali was a codex entry, but they really come into their own for the rest of the series.

And if you don't love Mordin from the get-go I don't know what to tell you.

As for the Council, they think you're loony for a relatively good reason. You've joined up with Cerberus, a terrorist organization (see my above paragraph) and you DIED and came back to life. You're now telling them that a super giant boogeymen is coming to kill everyone? I don't think I'd believe Shepard either.

Eh, my excuse was that the Council sucked then and they suck now. If Shepard saved the Citadel and sacrificed a chunk of the fleet for them after a whole game of their disbelief, he/she deserved a tad more recognition.

 

[Pikey Mikey]

I'm with you there Waffle, I liked ME 1 more than 2 (apart from the Tali-romance thingy in 2 (I really like Tali for some reason)). I liked the overheating instead of normal ammo, the mods for weapons and the fact that Carnage for shotguns was a thing. It just felt like more of a role-playing game (and more leveling up abilities/stats-choices/variety) than an action game. And I guess that's the point for me, I like RPGs more than Action games (there's just something about unique character, character interaction and having a large world to roam (of course, IF it's done right)).

But I have nothing against people who like ME 2 more, don't like Mass Effect at all or liked the ending of ME 3 (I personally didn't because I wanted to see that goddamn house on Rannoch) =P

Edit: And of course, Cerberus sucks, and the Council was just stupid to be stupid.

 

[raeior]

Another vote for ME1 being the best part of the series.
I can somewhat understand the rationale behind a lot of the changes in ME2 but they just changed them from one extreme to another.
The inventory was clunky as hell (i still loved it but hey..) so instead of trying to clean the interface up or anything they took it out entirely.
Repetitive area design? Well just take out most of the side-areas and make them a lot smaller.
The Mako missions were boring at times (again, I loved most of it but they could have been reduced at times) so just take them out completely. Even better, replace them with an annoying minigame!

I agree that the loyalty missions were done better in ME2 and some of the writing was too, but overall the story in 1 was just better. I still don't understand what ME2 means in the larger context because it all seems so pointless.
I also prefered the combat system of ME1 by far. Especially as a biotic I had the feeling of being really powerful (far too powerful actually...) while in ME2 being a biotic felt kinda useless because most enemies had shields/armor anyway (even more so in ME3). The sudden change from the heat system to ammunition was really weird too. Also the shared cooldowns...ugh!
All in all I prefer ME1 because it was a RPG first and an action game second while ME2..not so much. But I still love both titles.

 

[DoctorObviously]

I understand the OP to a point, and some of the things he says I find very valid concerns. I must say that I liked the original, loved the sequel, and hated the third game, which made any entry in the series invalid for me, unfortunately. I can't just 'pretend' the third one doesn't exist. But I digress. Characters are a matter of taste, I find. I liked most characters of ME2. In the instance that I didn't like them I was at least engaged with the dialogue. ME2 is the best of the three games because it has the almost perfect balance of everything in a game that I like: an engaging, well written story, characters that I developed real sympathy for, breathtaking worlds and visuals, unforgettable "oh snap!" moments, streamlined, flowing combat and most of all: fun.

 

[votemarvel]

Kill Wrex in ME1, so what? different voice actor and character model, zero effect on your Shep.

Urdont Wreav has a completely different mindset to Urdnot Wrex.

The difference comes from whether you would trust this person in the same situations as the other character.

Onto ME3. I played on PC, where as ME1 I played on 360. So im unsure if this is why this happened;
I met the Rachni. And my Shep had no idea who they were. Surely the cannon of ME means I either saved or killed them.
Did any of the characters who could have died in ME2 effect ME3? Not as far as I could tell.

Shepard should have recognised the species, since Feros was the only ME1 planet removed from the Genesis choice comics.

Beyond a war asset or two, none of the returning characters had an impact on the story.

Bioware stated that the third game was the best point to enter the trilogy and didn't want anyone to miss out on content because they hadn't played the previous two games.

ME1 had a Lovecraftian enemy, ME 2&3 over explained the Reapers, and with that explanation they were nowhere near as intersting to me.

I have to agree.

To me the Reapers didn't need an explanation beyond they wanted to kill us all.

Sometimes a badguy just needs to be a badguy.

what happened to the ammo, zero explanation given to a galaxy wide change.

They do try and explain it in the codex. Apparently after Eden Prime the Alliance analysed Geth Weapons and found that the heat sink system they used was more effective and allowed you to out more rounds down field.

Only weird thing is that the Geth weapons you get in ME1, don't use Heat Sinks.

ME1 had a 80s gritty scifi homage. ME2&3 went to modern shooter story telling style.

Which seems to have worked for them. Most would say that ME2 and 3 are better because they went to traditional shooter for the bulk of the combat rather than using the dice-roll of ME1.

And I missed the numbers management. Whether armour with 0.5% improvement in one field is worth the 1% loss in another field.

I think it is that people go into ME1 expecting a shooter but don't get that, they don't expect the dice-roll to play a part. When in fact it is about the most important part and needs attention paid.

EDIT I loved Mordin

My favourite part of the trilogy is Tali's loyalty mission in ME2. Superb pacing and the voice acting is never bettered.

 

[Maximum Bert]

ME2 was marketed really heavily and it wasnt a bad game so it got a lot of acclaim from that alone. As a game I felt it was ok I mean it was really linear which isnt bad in itself but it somehow gets a free ride here unlike other linear games.

Gameplay wise it was kinda fun I enjoyed my Insanity playthrough more than my normal run through but planet scanning is still one of the least fun mini games ever invented it must have been intensively playtested to make sure no fun remained in its design.

The characters were also mostly Ok I personally hated Garrus with a passion (like on the same level as Snow from FFXIII level) but it seems I was in the minority.

Its basically hugely over rated like most popular or cult games are so if you believed the hype you will be disapointed play it for what it is and you will likely get some enjoyment out of it.

From a personal standpoint it killed the series for me I just had no interest in continuing after ME2 and couldnt care less about the Reapers or Shepard or anyone else in the universe I did get to kill Garrus though so that was fun. Actually come to think of it I dont know anyone who finished ME3 then again I only know one person who bought it, most (well all I suppose) of my friends lost interest after 2 feeling it was pretty weak.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Kill Wrex in ME1, so what? different voice actor and character model, zero effect on your Shep.

Urdont Wreav has a completely different mindset to Urdnot Wrex.

The difference comes from whether you would trust this person in the same situations as the other character.

Is there a difference in outcome? do I (Shep) gain anything by it being Wrex, even if it was a side mission, a special weapon, perk, ship mod for Wrex surviving? or vice versa, something gained for him dying?
I'm going back a few years now, but for 3 or 4 playthroughs, I don't remember Wrex effecting a game play out side of the voice actor.

Onto ME3. I played on PC, where as ME1 I played on 360. So im unsure if this is why this happened;
I met the Rachni. And my Shep had no idea who they were. Surely the cannon of ME means I either saved or killed them.
Did any of the characters who could have died in ME2 effect ME3? Not as far as I could tell.

Shepard should have recognised the species, since Feros was the only ME1 planet removed from the Genesis choice comics.

Beyond a war asset or two, none of the returning characters had an impact on the story.

Bioware stated that the third game was the best point to enter the trilogy and didn't want anyone to miss out on content because they hadn't played the previous two games.

shame that they couldnt they have gone with another Genesis comic book choice thing then, as once again it re-enforced for me that my choices and effect on this world were meaningless. as for not wanting people to miss out, its not like its multigenerational, if people cared that much, they'd have probably found a way to pick it up.

ME1 had a Lovecraftian enemy, ME 2&3 over explained the Reapers, and with that explanation they were nowhere near as intersting to me.

I have to agree.

To me the Reapers didn't need an explanation beyond they wanted to kill us all.

Sometimes a badguy just needs to be a badguy.

what happened to the ammo, zero explanation given to a galaxy wide change.

They do try and explain it in the codex. Apparently after Eden Prime the Alliance analysed Geth Weapons and found that the heat sink system they used was more effective and allowed you to out more rounds down field.

Only weird thing is that the Geth weapons you get in ME1, don't use Heat Sinks.

my bad, I didnt follow the Codex as much as the first game. but as you point out, it doesnt add up anyway with the explanation given.

ME1 had a 80s gritty scifi homage. ME2&3 went to modern shooter story telling style.

Which seems to have worked for them. Most would say that ME2 and 3 are better because they went to traditional shooter for the bulk of the combat rather than using the dice-roll of ME1.

I wont deny it probably got them a lot more sales putting a Mass Effect skin on a 3rd person shooter template. but they sold it to my as a dice roll game, as part of a trilogy, I wouldnt be botherered if the 3 games were cover based shooters, but the first got me hooked, so 2 hurt me, took me a few plays for me to accept it was no longer the franchise i'd been promised.

And I missed the numbers management. Whether armour with 0.5% improvement in one field is worth the 1% loss in another field.

I think it is that people go into ME1 expecting a shooter but don't get that, they don't expect the dice-roll to play a part. When in fact it is about the most important part and needs attention paid.

i guess all I can say is; it was a BioWare game, dice roll is what they do (did). I've nothing about BW changing to making the games that bring in the biggest money, thats their choice. hey, i'd love to make that money.
But it has left a sour taste in my mouth that had happened between ME1 and ME2. didn't bother me as much with DA:O and DA2, DA:O's story is complete on its own.

EDIT I loved Mordin

My favourite part of the trilogy is Tali's loyalty mission in ME2. Superb pacing and the voice acting is never bettered.

never know, i may get the trilogy when its going dirt cheap on Origin. knowing what I know, i may bew able to enjoy it with fresh appreciation.

hope this response isnt too long, i'm not usedd to people replying to multiple points haha

 

[LetalisK]

I dunno, it just has that appeal. Though, outside of stylistic preferences like preferring a more RPG approach to a shooter approach, event driven vs character driven, or heat sinks vs clips, I've noticed that most of the issues with the game cited here and elsewhere are addressed in the game itself fairly well.