Poll: Mass Effect vs. Mass Effect 2
- Thread starter Koroviev
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I read the entire thread so far, and my choice would also be ME1. It feels more grand, more like the story has something todo with yourself. Although, seeing the SR2 appear and seeing Joker at the help again gave me goosebumps 
I don't understand this, to be honest. I liked driving around in the Mako, even though it got boring quickly. But I also liked planet scanning. Both are optional game elements and liking or disliking them shouldn't influence your opinion of the game.Koroviev said:
Ahh right, that's a point I disliked about ME:2, the choices were fuzzy as hell every now-and-then... I always play as paragon first, and ME:2 made that quite hard...Koroviev said:
ME2 felt like it had more meaning to it. Im ME1, most of your team seemed to join you just because you talked to them for a little. In 2, while it was difficult, getting people to fight for your cause was a long affair that added depth to each character.
Also, the elevators in 2 weren't longer than reading the bible.
Also, the elevators in 2 weren't longer than reading the bible.
One thing I really liked was that ME1 seemed to focus on showing us the "genophage is bad" arguement, since you had Wrex and no one to really argue for it; while ME2 had Mordin for it and no Krogan to go against it (since Grunt didnt really know what was ging on)BattleBunny said:
Itll probably culminate with a big choice about it in ME3..
Haven't played ME2 yet (since I have to wait for the PS3 version), but ME1 didn't impress me to much...maybe because I had only one day to play it...but I finished it in that day with all sidequests and without skipping any dialogue...so that alone disappoints me from a RPG perspective. The story (or what I remember from it) also didn't surprise me..maybe because I have read just about every sci-fi novel in the world and there is not much I haven't already seen...
Edit: The argument against ME2 regarding fuzzy choices is actually a plus for me...I don't like choices that are black/white and I don't choose what I think is good/bad, but what I would do in the given situation...
Edit: The argument against ME2 regarding fuzzy choices is actually a plus for me...I don't like choices that are black/white and I don't choose what I think is good/bad, but what I would do in the given situation...
I enjoyed the unrealistic handling of the Mako in ME1. It was a releif compared to other games with more "realistic" handling features.
Mass Effect 1 easily. It was more of an rpg,the story was better. I thought the ending boss fight was much better than two's. I had an inventory and there were plenty of guns.
Wait, do you mean every sidequest including the Mako ones? Is that possible to do in a day? Im pretty sure I had like 30-50 hours on the run I didPiflik said:
The reason I never managed to stand ME2 was the gameplay. The combat was so clunky and with a cover system that bad I just couldn't understand how anyone could endure all that punishment. I understand that the story is good and believe me, after reading the wiki it does seem intriguing, but in order to have a good game you have to have good gameplay as well and unfortunately, for me, Mass Effect lacked in that category.
Mass Effect 2 completely revitalized a series I practically considered dead before it had even started. The gameplay suddenly became good and whilst the story wasn't as great as Mass Effect's it was still intriguing. All in all, the boost to gameplay was enough of a plus for the shortcomings in the story. Don't get me wrong, the characters were great and so was the voice acting but making a game all about recruiting crew members isn't really that interesting. I guess they hoped the characters would drive the story through their unique personalities but due to the nature of games it just didn't work out.
Mass Effect 2 completely revitalized a series I practically considered dead before it had even started. The gameplay suddenly became good and whilst the story wasn't as great as Mass Effect's it was still intriguing. All in all, the boost to gameplay was enough of a plus for the shortcomings in the story. Don't get me wrong, the characters were great and so was the voice acting but making a game all about recruiting crew members isn't really that interesting. I guess they hoped the characters would drive the story through their unique personalities but due to the nature of games it just didn't work out.
i liked mass effect's plot but gameplay was lacking.
i did not like mass effect 2's plot (aside from legion) and while the shooting was fun, the stat location was even worse than the first.
i did not like mass effect 2's plot (aside from legion) and while the shooting was fun, the stat location was even worse than the first.
I would have to say ME1 because ME 2 has more flaws overall.
I really want to pick on the fact that Legion was placed towards the end of the game was more of a negative decision they made within short notice, having using a Save editor I got Legion at the beginning and there are a few interesting cutscenes for it also I found Legion to be the 2nd or 3rd most engaging character for me.
The game play I would have to agree on although I did feel that ME1 went over the top with the inventory, weapon collection .ect, ME2 does too little to suffice and ultimately trips over it's intention to simply things,
I didn't mind the main story of ME2 but when ****SPOILER**** I saw the human reaper for the first time I reacted fairly negativity due to the inconsistency and the lack of an Prothean reaper (slaver) seemed very strange.****SPOILER****
I really want to pick on the fact that Legion was placed towards the end of the game was more of a negative decision they made within short notice, having using a Save editor I got Legion at the beginning and there are a few interesting cutscenes for it also I found Legion to be the 2nd or 3rd most engaging character for me.
The game play I would have to agree on although I did feel that ME1 went over the top with the inventory, weapon collection .ect, ME2 does too little to suffice and ultimately trips over it's intention to simply things,
I didn't mind the main story of ME2 but when ****SPOILER**** I saw the human reaper for the first time I reacted fairly negativity due to the inconsistency and the lack of an Prothean reaper (slaver) seemed very strange.****SPOILER****
Mass Effect 2 for me. Using powers is exhilarating in it, to the point that playing as a soldier just seems like a complete waste. Vanguard is where it's at. The gameplay is so much improved in the second game. The locations look better but somehow feel smaller (without actually being smaller, except for the Citadel).
But story-wise, they're both part of the same series. I'm not going to say one has a better story than the other when they're just different chapters. You have great characters, great voice acting (by female and male Shepard. I'm not on the male-Shep hate bandwagon). We also have Martin Sheen and 2 out of the 3 leads from my favorite TV show (Chuck).
The third will surpass the second in gameplay, however if it lets us participate in an epic space battle. You can do it, Bioware!
But story-wise, they're both part of the same series. I'm not going to say one has a better story than the other when they're just different chapters. You have great characters, great voice acting (by female and male Shepard. I'm not on the male-Shep hate bandwagon). We also have Martin Sheen and 2 out of the 3 leads from my favorite TV show (Chuck).
The third will surpass the second in gameplay, however if it lets us participate in an epic space battle. You can do it, Bioware!
The first one was great, no question, but it felt like the second one took everything that was great about the first and built upon them while leaving behind most of the crappy parts.
Things I feel that were improved by the second:
-The Hammerhead. Well, okay, it's an improvement by default.
-Ammo. I know it seems weird, but having infinite ammo in the first made me really impatient because it's hard to quantify damage-per-shot when you've got no reason to keep track of how many you've fired, and discouraged me from trying new weapons because my assault rifle was a firehose of death with a bottomless reservoir. Plus, scavenging for clips and reloading made combat feel more varied and tense.
-Space ships. In the first Mass Effect, the only ships you saw for any significant amount of time were the Destiny Ascension, Sovereign and the Normandy, and everything else was more-or-less left for you to imagine based on a small picture in the codex. It really took away from how rewarding the space battle in the end could have been, because without the ability to tell a Turian ship from a human one, I honestly had no idea what the hell was going on. The only real exceptions to this were the Geth ships, but if you put them side-by-side with a Covenant vessel from the Halo universe and I'd have to give it serious thought. It was kind of like a city without cars. The second game adds the derelict reaper, the Shadow Broker's jaw-droppingly awesome ship, the Collector vessel, and shows your team interacting with the citadel transports. It's not a huge improvement, but it's enough to remind you that you are in the future, and not just being ferried from place to place by a space ship so you can have conventional firefights under a funny-looking sky.
-Characters. Well, this one's simple: I don't know whether there were more characters to interact with, but with how memorable most of them are in the second, it certainly feels like there were more. Who made a bigger impact, Fai Dan or the Asari on Illium that wanted to perform experiments on the colony? Keep in mind that Fai Dan was a mission-critical character (if you don't remember him, he's the colonist on Feros who shot himself in the head), whereas the Asari was just an opportunity to score Paragon/Renegade points. Stronger, more distinct characters helped to add a very personal touch, and it really contributed to the overall experience in a "this is what you're fighting for" kind of way... to say nothing of your crew.
-Art. The first game had a highly washed-out color scheme, to the point that the prothean flashbacks were shockingly vibrant. The plausible-future look served its purpose, but it was never particularly striking. The sequel, likely because it was free to build on a pre-established setting, was much more stylized and attractive, looking very much like a populated future instead of a bunch of industrial sites. The colors were more saturated, the architecture had character, and the technologies went from utilitarian to stylish-but-functional. Now, with that said, it may just be personal preference on my part, but I feel like if Feros was designed within the same parameters as Illium, it would've made for a much more memorable experience (those sky bridges were a missed opportunity to show off a gorgeous vista to establish the uniqueness of the setting).
And that's just a couple of things off the top of my head.
Things I feel that were improved by the second:
-The Hammerhead. Well, okay, it's an improvement by default.
-Ammo. I know it seems weird, but having infinite ammo in the first made me really impatient because it's hard to quantify damage-per-shot when you've got no reason to keep track of how many you've fired, and discouraged me from trying new weapons because my assault rifle was a firehose of death with a bottomless reservoir. Plus, scavenging for clips and reloading made combat feel more varied and tense.
-Space ships. In the first Mass Effect, the only ships you saw for any significant amount of time were the Destiny Ascension, Sovereign and the Normandy, and everything else was more-or-less left for you to imagine based on a small picture in the codex. It really took away from how rewarding the space battle in the end could have been, because without the ability to tell a Turian ship from a human one, I honestly had no idea what the hell was going on. The only real exceptions to this were the Geth ships, but if you put them side-by-side with a Covenant vessel from the Halo universe and I'd have to give it serious thought. It was kind of like a city without cars. The second game adds the derelict reaper, the Shadow Broker's jaw-droppingly awesome ship, the Collector vessel, and shows your team interacting with the citadel transports. It's not a huge improvement, but it's enough to remind you that you are in the future, and not just being ferried from place to place by a space ship so you can have conventional firefights under a funny-looking sky.
-Characters. Well, this one's simple: I don't know whether there were more characters to interact with, but with how memorable most of them are in the second, it certainly feels like there were more. Who made a bigger impact, Fai Dan or the Asari on Illium that wanted to perform experiments on the colony? Keep in mind that Fai Dan was a mission-critical character (if you don't remember him, he's the colonist on Feros who shot himself in the head), whereas the Asari was just an opportunity to score Paragon/Renegade points. Stronger, more distinct characters helped to add a very personal touch, and it really contributed to the overall experience in a "this is what you're fighting for" kind of way... to say nothing of your crew.
-Art. The first game had a highly washed-out color scheme, to the point that the prothean flashbacks were shockingly vibrant. The plausible-future look served its purpose, but it was never particularly striking. The sequel, likely because it was free to build on a pre-established setting, was much more stylized and attractive, looking very much like a populated future instead of a bunch of industrial sites. The colors were more saturated, the architecture had character, and the technologies went from utilitarian to stylish-but-functional. Now, with that said, it may just be personal preference on my part, but I feel like if Feros was designed within the same parameters as Illium, it would've made for a much more memorable experience (those sky bridges were a missed opportunity to show off a gorgeous vista to establish the uniqueness of the setting).
And that's just a couple of things off the top of my head.
I can't decide. I love both games. Combat in ME2 is definitely better and it does a lot of things better like obviously the graphics, more characters, better animations etc. but some things like more armors, weapons, weapon mods etc. are missing. And the atmosphere in ME1 is a lot better than in ME2. It's probably because of all that introduction to the universe of ME1 that captivated my so much. Both are amazing games and it wouldn't be fail of me to chose a favorite.