Poll: Question regarding the Mass Effect Trilogy

[A.A.K]

So, a couple of days ago I saw all three Mass Effect games packed together and for the price of a normal new release game (79 bucks here in Australia, pretty much equivalent to 60 bucks in the US). Having never played any of them before, and after hearing great things about them over the years (for the most part), I decided to purchase it.
The reason I haven't begun to play any of the games just yet is because I'm not sure whether I necessarily need to play the first one- I know it'd probably be best to play it to have the story make more sense later on, but then again, I've heard the game play is quite clunky, especially by today's standards, and the game itself is fairly old, and therefore unlikely to be mind-blowing in the graphical department.
So my question is: should I bother with the first Mass Effect? I'd like to know your opinions on how well the game-play holds up, as well as how relevant it is to the other games in the trilogy. It'd also be nice to know if I'd be better off just racing through the story missions in order to get on with the other two games as quickly as possible, or whether I should take my time with the game because it still holds up as a legitimately great experience.
Thanks in advance.

Your decisions matter in the first game:
Don't kill Wrex.
Don't let Kirrahe die.
Save the Rachni Queen.
Save the Council.

Those impact the 3rd game in the most significant way. So, I recommend playing the first game even for those things.


But yea, the first game is really good. I highly recommend. It's fun, it's dodgey, but it's fun.

 

[crazyrabbits]

Your decisions matter in the first game:

Funny, because last time I checked, they didn't do fuckall to anything besides flavour text and a couple alternate scenes. The choices mattered in the same way the choices in the Walking Dead game mattered - you have limited agency over anything related to the narrative, but you're fooled into believing you do.

Don't kill Wrex.

Which does nothing besides change a two or three scenes in the second game, and two or three scenes in the third. You get the exact same outcome if you have Wreav and lie to him about the Genophage cure to get his help.

Don't let Kirrahe die.

This is the one I always laugh at. In actuality, you gain more War Asset points in the long run by letting him die in the first game, then playing through to the third. The only extra thing you really get is that one scene on Sur'kesh where he talks to you again. Everything else is just meaningless.

Save the Rachni Queen.

Which makes no difference besides a handful of War Asset points. If you save her, she shows up again. If you don't save her, you find out that the Reapers made a copy that looks just like her. The only net result is that if you spare the indoctrinated clone, it gives a hit to one of your War Asset branches. No big sweeping, "we'll help you cleanse the darkness" style resolutions like the second game implied.

Save the Council.

For a whopping difference of 30 War Asset points. Nothing changes regardless of whether you saved them or not, besides flavour text. Both the old/new Council still doesn't believe, and gets convinced if you save them in the Citadel. The "fleets arrive" scene doesn't change in any way if you have the Destiny Ascension (besides one ship model being different).

Same thing with the Collector Base. There's a difference of 10 points depending on if you saved it or not, and the only thing that changes are three lines of dialogue. It retroactively made the big moral decision of 2 completely pointless, because it ends up the exact same way.

 

[A.A.K]

- snip -

eugh....I'm really sick of talking about mass effect with people like you.
The entire game is irrelevant, the playing the trilogy is an arbitrary time sink that accomplishes nothing but wasting between 40 and 100 hours depending how you play.... Like most games.
Most decisions you'll make in your entire life will be pointless and irrelevant. They might change a couple of conversations or how wealthy you may or may not be, but shit is pointless.

For the game, decisions matter.
Just like my decision to drink coffee in the morning matters, or whether I want tea.

 

[votemarvel]

Definitely play the first game. It was and indeed remains the best of the trilogy.

Combat clunky?

How so? You lightly press against cover to enter, pull away to exit, that's really clunky compared to pressing the A button? Sorry I don't see how one is more 'clunky' than the other.

Not once in the first Mass Effect did I ever get stuck to an exposed wall while running for cover

When you are in cover you pop-up to aim and shoot, or use powers, just as you would in the following two titles.

You have the ability to crouch in Mass Effect 1. Many don't see it as a huge thing but it lets you take advantage of cover without the need to be pressed against it.

Armour and shields are actually effective, instead of being stripped near instantly as in ME2 and 3. This gives you greater mobility around the battlefield as you aren't limited to looking for your next chest high wall.

In Mass Effect 1, your ability isn't just down to your ability to place a cross-hair but also by Shepard's skill with the weapon. I like this but many do not, part of the reason I do is that the enemy is bound by the same rules. Unlike the next two game the bad-guys can actually miss.

Story-wise the first game takes it for me because the story just feels so cohesive, everything feels as if it is taking place in the same universe, and Saren is a brilliant antagonist. That being said however my favourite story moment in the trilogy did take place in the second game, Tali's loyalty mission.

Mass Effect 3 story-wise is just bad. It isn't just the ending, the bulk of the game has poor writing. You get a few standout moments, Grissom Academy with a couple of the missions on Rannoch and Tuchanka, but overall you get the feeling the story stuff is just in the way of all the 'awesome' pew-pew shooting galleries.

Graphically I call it a tie. Mass Effect 1 shows its age with texture pop-in and copy/paste side-quest locations but the animation remains the best of the bunch for me. Shepard in ME2 and 3 moves like a hunchback gorilla.

ME2 makes the characters look the best but they move worse than in the first game. Mass Effect 3 has the best backgrounds but the characters all have a plastic quality to them and the game is rife with comedy animations.

I know I've rambled a bit there but if anyone has a specific question I'll do my very best to check back and answer them.

When I first finished Mass Effect 1 the very first thing I did was start again, I've put more hours into this game than I care to think about. When I finished ME2 I paused because I didn't like a lot of the changes but I still replayed it many times later because it has an overall feel of quality about it.

Mass Effect 3 I just stopped playing because I never thought I'd end up disliking a Mass Effect title as much as that. I reloaded a save to see what the Extended Cut DLC was like but I've not felt the desire to replay the single player portion of the game since then.

Oddly enough the best part of Mass Effect 3 is the one I did expect to hate and that is the multi-player. It's just a horde mode I know but it has an air of quality about it that the single player never achieved throughout ME3.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

So, a couple of days ago I saw all three Mass Effect games packed together and for the price of a normal new release game (79 bucks here in Australia, pretty much equivalent to 60 bucks in the US). Having never played any of them before, and after hearing great things about them over the years (for the most part), I decided to purchase it.
Thanks in advance.

They released it in Australia a week early?!

I can't buy my copy until the 4th.

At least, I think it was the 4th. Or maybe that was a book. Now I need to go look.

But yeah, totally worth it, as your poll has overwhelmingly showed.

ME1 is a great game, and it's worth getting the story for ME2 and 3.

I played ME1 on PC after playing ME2 on PS3 and wanting the backstory. Now, I'm eagerly waiting the chance to buy ME1 for PS3, which is to be released on the same day as the three-pack.

Not only is it worth it, it is worth buying the game a second time to get it on my PS3 so I can play them all together, back to back.

 

[Snotnarok]

The first game is a bit dated in some regards but it's certainly no slouch in the series. I think one of the larger problems is you're better off playing a Soldier class and using your allies to help with their powers. At least that's what I've observed.

 

[PirateRose]

I personally like the second over the first, but the first is still good to play for some background story and an introduction to the universe. When I got ME2 for free on the PC (it was some deal with DA2 pc), I did a play through and realized how much stuff was missing if you don't import. It's minor stuff in retrospect, but annoying when you're a fan.

 

[sammysoso]

The shooting mechanics aren't great, and it doesn't run all that well. (unless they optimized it better for the re-release) But they aren't so bad that you should avoid the best game in the series.

The atmosphere, visuals, music, sound are all geared towards old school science fiction, something the rest of the series unfortunately abandoned.

It's also one of the few AAA games with an understanding of subtlety, and the only game in the series with a decent, coherent plot (not the writing itself, that's solid throughout the series).

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

I loved all three and if you're planning on playing any of them, start at the beginning. That's the advice I've given every one of my friends who were interested in Mass Effect, and that's what I'll be saying till the day I die.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

The first game is important because of the story and worth playing on it's strength alone. That said, if you do play the first, focus solely on the main story missions. Being higher level does not make the game any easier (it remains exactly as tedious from a mechanical standpoint regardless of level) and the side mission stuff is incredibly tedious and, better still, none of it actually matters in any significant way. Anything the games draw on in a non-incidental fashion will come from those main quests.

The second game, in spite of what people are likely to say, is mechanically stronger than the first by a wide margin. There are plenty of accusations that it is less of an RPG because there are functionally fewer discrete choices to make in construction of a character as you play is largely a toothless one in my view. You have fewer choices to make, certainly, but at least those choices you do make are notable. For example, there was no functional difference between a soldier's use of a sniper rifle and an Infiltrator's until the second game. That said, while the second was the most beloved of the series it is also the weakest when it comes to narrative as the main plot engages in a long holding pattern while you accomplish some task that is notable but hardly earth shattering.

The third game is, in my view, the strongest of the bunch mechanically. This is because it functionally becomes nothing but a shooter in the end, but competence in the core gameplay area is important when you spend a great deal of time in action segments between the story bits. Most would agree that the narrative is strong throughout but the general consensus is the ending is weak. I don't particularly subscribe to that notion as the ending is narratively consistent but that is a matter of personal taste.

 

[Tsun Tzu]

/snip

Thank you. You've managed to encapsulate my feelings on both the series and my answer to the OP's question.

Seriously. Thank you. I was all set to launch into a tirade, but I read this post and it saved me a good ten minutes. <3

 

[MetalMagpie]

It's funny how people here are either saying ME1 is the best or worst of the three. I guess that shows you that whether you will enjoy it or not is completely up to your tastes and whatnot in gameplay and storytelling.
Personally, I think ME1 is by far the best one. I've played it front to back, every sidequest at least 15 times. ME2 got dry and mechanical after 4 or so runthroughs. Somehow for me ME1 never got tired. ME3 is shit in comparison. Sure, 3 is flashier and cleaner, but it's just so lifeless, somehow. Never even finished my second run of ME3, it's just so robotic.

I think you've got it spot on. My boyfriend loved the first Mass Effect when it came out. But after playing ME2 he found he couldn't manage another playthrough of ME1. The combat just felt "really painful" compared to ME2, which stopped him enjoying it.

I've got the impression from what people say that ME1 is more RPG and ME2 is more 3rd person shooter. So it depends what you prefer. My boyfriend is a fan of both shooters and RPGs, and says ME2 is the perfect balance for him.

Why would you 'not' play it? :/

It gives you 15 - 20 hours of additional understanding and back-story, which makes 2 and 3 even better to play.

Because it will take 15 - 20 hours?

Personally, I haven't played any of the Mass Effect games yet, but I am planning to give one a try at some point (probably once I stop being distracted by Borderlands 2 and Torchlight 2). But I do only want to commit to playing one, because there are a lot of other games I want to play as well and my free time is limited!

My boyfriend recommends I try ME2, as a) it's his favourite and b) he thinks it has the best shooting. (He knows I'm more of a gameplay person than a story person.)

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

So, a couple of days ago I saw all three Mass Effect games packed together and for the price of a normal new release game (79 bucks here in Australia, pretty much equivalent to 60 bucks in the US). Having never played any of them before, and after hearing great things about them over the years (for the most part), I decided to purchase it.
The reason I haven't begun to play any of the games just yet is because I'm not sure whether I necessarily need to play the first one- I know it'd probably be best to play it to have the story make more sense later on, but then again, I've heard the game play is quite clunky, especially by today's standards, and the game itself is fairly old, and therefore unlikely to be mind-blowing in the graphical department.
So my question is: should I bother with the first Mass Effect? I'd like to know your opinions on how well the game-play holds up, as well as how relevant it is to the other games in the trilogy. It'd also be nice to know if I'd be better off just racing through the story missions in order to get on with the other two games as quickly as possible, or whether I should take my time with the game because it still holds up as a legitimately great experience.
Thanks in advance.

-slap- play -slap- the -slap- first -slap- Mass Effect.

It is awesome, the graphics are decent, and for fuck sakes its what started it all. Think, theres a reason for it. I actually think the first one is the best one simple because the universe felt more real. (yes I'm talking about the Mako runs) Its a damn good game. Play it or I'll slap you some more.

 

[kahlzun]

ME1 is probably the best of the 3. I had fun with 2, and literally cried at some parts of 3, but 1 is just fun and campy

 

[crazyrabbits]

eugh....I'm really sick of talking about mass effect with people like you.

And I'm sick of the sycophantic fanboys like you who use strawman arguments to try and whitewash the problems with the game. Funny how perspective works, huh?

The entire game is irrelevant, the playing the trilogy is an arbitrary time sink that accomplishes nothing but wasting between 40 and 100 hours depending how you play.... Like most games.

That's...not the point. If you make a game, you have a responsibility to make some sort of resolution. A publisher wants to make money, but they do so through offering compelling content that keeps players coming back. Sure, you could say the same thing about any medium, but all works of fiction usually have a resolution to them.

Honestly, it's like asking why reading the complete works of Sherlock Holmes is pointless because you invest dozens of hours into reading them. Whether you want to relax and enjoy something, gain new perspective on something or want to watch a compelling narrative that subverts the genre, there's plenty of relevance to fictional works. You've come at this from the worst possible perspective.

Most decisions you'll make in your entire life will be pointless and irrelevant.

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you trying to compare real life to a video game, or are you just being a pessimist? If you really think that way, and you think "shit is pointless", perhaps you could jump off a bridge and spare me your pointless rambling.

By your logic, being here on a message board talking about games is pointless and irrelevant. If that's the case, why have you spent time (enough to post 742 times) if none of it matters?

Honestly, it's like you WANT to be laughed at. You didn't even answer my argument.

 

[Eddie the head]

Yeah, like I said people have a tendency to attach to the first game in a series that they have played. For most people Mass Effect 1 was there first Mass Effect game so they hold it above the other ones despite the improvements. What I mean is I don't think it's much "tastes" as it is nostalgia.

If you played Mass Effect 2 then Mass Effect 1 and liked it more, I would like to hear why. If you played 1 then 2, your opinion means less to me. Just me but if you say the first game you played in any series is the best, you better have some damn good reasons why.

I bought one and two at the same time. Played one first, then immediately went on to two. Technically I still played one first, but its really not nostalgia when 1 is also the last [Read: Most recent] Mass Effect game I played, 'cause I found two and three to be disappointing and its not just looking on with fond memories of 1 - I actually play it and enjoy it more.

What you said just kind of proves my point. The first in the series you played if your favorite? Right? Well what I said was it was your first so it's likely to be your favorite. Not necessarily nostalgia, but the game that you played first. When I said Nostalgic I meant it in a lose way. Meaning it's not "nostalgia" per-say but nostalgia was the closest thing to what I was talking about. So yeah not nostalgia, but an attachment to your first.

Not just Mass Effect suffers form this. The Legend of Zelda, ask most people what there favorite is and I bet it will be the first one they played. Mario same thing. The Elder Scrolls, you see it all the time with that one.

 

[AD-Stu]

Not just Mass Effect suffers form this. The Legend of Zelda, ask most people what there favorite is and I bet it will be the first one they played. Mario same thing. The Elder Scrolls, you see it all the time with that one.

Most Wanted is my favourite game in the Need For Speed series, and it's definitely not the first one of those I played (or the last either). Assassins Creed II, Guitar Hero III, Ultima VII, Monkey Island II, Warcraft II, I'm showing my age now... none of them were the first games I played in their respective series, but they're my favourites (and when it comes to games like Ultima and Monkey Island, I LOVED the previous installments).

Yet ME1 happens to be my favourite game in the Mass Effect series and yes, it was the one I played first. If I think back over all the game franchises that I actually like, Mass Effect is almost the odd one out in that sense. But my opinion on it shouldn't count because I played it first?

Sorry, can't take you seriously on that. Next you'll be telling me I'm wrong about Powerslave being the best Iron Maiden album just because I bought it before Piece of Mind...

 

[Joccaren]

What you said just kind of proves my point. The first in the series you played if your favorite? Right? Well what I said was it was your first so it's likely to be your favorite. Not necessarily nostalgia, but the game that you played first. When I said Nostalgic I meant it in a lose way. Meaning it's not "nostalgia" per-say but nostalgia was the closest thing to what I was talking about. So yeah not nostalgia, but an attachment to your first.

Not just Mass Effect suffers form this. The Legend of Zelda, ask most people what there favorite is and I bet it will be the first one they played. Mario same thing. The Elder Scrolls, you see it all the time with that one.

Eh, I played 1 and two within the same week, so my attachment to one shouldn't be that much stronger because I played it a few days before 2.
Either way, the main reason I don't like two is thanks to how simple and generic most of it is. You could chalk it up to just being attached to the first one, but no matter what game it is - if it plays like 2 or three I get bored of it quickly. If its down to anything its down to the first games I ever played being the Civilization series, and the first FPS I ever played being Quake, and me preferring that gameplay by far to the new modern stuff. Mass Effect 1 wins out thanks to its slower paced and different gameplay, and would whether I'd played 2 then 1, or 1 then 2. Its what I've come to like in the way of gameplay from the past games that I've played, rather than just liking the first game I play in a series.

 

[Frezzato]

What you said just kind of proves my point. The first in the series you played if your favorite? Right? Well what I said was it was your first so it's likely to be your favorite. Not necessarily nostalgia, but the game that you played first. When I said Nostalgic I meant it in a lose way. Meaning it's not "nostalgia" per-say but nostalgia was the closest thing to what I was talking about. So yeah not nostalgia, but an attachment to your first.

Not just Mass Effect suffers form this. The Legend of Zelda, ask most people what there favorite is and I bet it will be the first one they played. Mario same thing. The Elder Scrolls, you see it all the time with that one.

Eh, I played 1 and two within the same week, so my attachment to one shouldn't be that much stronger because I played it a few days before 2.
Either way, the main reason I don't like two is thanks to how simple and generic most of it is. You could chalk it up to just being attached to the first one, but no matter what game it is - if it plays like 2 or three I get bored of it quickly. If its down to anything its down to the first games I ever played being the Civilization series, and the first FPS I ever played being Quake, and me preferring that gameplay by far to the new modern stuff. Mass Effect 1 wins out thanks to its slower paced and different gameplay, and would whether I'd played 2 then 1, or 1 then 2. Its what I've come to like in the way of gameplay from the past games that I've played, rather than just liking the first game I play in a series.

Aaaargh, this is so cool. I wish somebody would run an experiment about this! I'm one of the few people who liked KoTOR 2 better than the first, based on the feel of the inventory and leveling up screens, and Kreia's final message to you. Other than that the games felt the same to me. And I have to agree with Joccaren about ME1. The suit/weapon upgrade items made tinkering in the game fun, not to mention infinite ammo. The use of heat sink cartridges in ME2 turned the guns into regular, magazine-fed weapons. And the Mako? I'll take the Mako over planet scanning any day of the week.

I think Eddie the head has popular culture on his side, but I also think Mass Effect is different because it's relatively new; they all came out on the same console, as opposed to other games that bridged the generational gap, like Halo. Damn, if the world can come up with the Tropes concept, why can't we find a term for this...this bias for the first thing we experience? "Initial Experiential Bias"? So yeah, I think there tends to be a bias for the first in a series we encounter. For me: Simpsons Hit and Run > The Simpsons Game, Burnout 3 > Everything that followed. But is it possible that people can like a sequel more than the first in a series?


Yes.

 

[Rangerboy87]

I played the first one PC a few years ago. I own a PS3 and ME2 was coming, so I wanted to play ME1 to get the backstory. I loved the story but the clunky controls (and my shitty laptop giving it major lagging issues) made it hard to play through.

Having said that though, it is worth playing through and glad you're enjoying it (totally sympathize with that Mako though). I myself will buy ME1 on the PSN when it gets here. I am hoping the switch will help it be more playable for me, because I do love the story and characters and really want to tie the whole trilogy together (not just start at 2).