The Mass Effect 2 conundrum

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

This is the second topic I make on the Escapist, but it is on a subject I've been thinking about for the past week that I felt I wanted to discuss with some fellow gamers. So without further ado:

I liked Mass Effect, it was not a perfect game but the gameplay was fun and even if the mechanics were occasionally a bit wonky it delivered a solid enough experience for me to play through it three times (or giving me about 70 hours of play time if you will). It wasn't just the story or the fact that I had to explore both the Paragon and the Renegade options, but the fact that the game was fun to play that made me come back.

So naturally, I was psyched for ME2. I was glad to hear they were actually revising the classes to make them more unique (especially when they actually gave the Sentinel a niche) and revising the gameplay to make it tighter and the mechanics more solid. So far in ME2, I've managed to complete the game once and never even got off Omega on my second playthrough. Why? My own explanation is two fold, the first is that while the combat is tighter and plays out a lot better, it is often very repetitive. Run into open area, get attacked, find cover, shoot back/use biotics/use techs, run into next open area. There are many set pieces, but none of them really stood out for me.

The other is that ME2 plays more like a shooter then an RPG. You have "hub" areas that are safe and you have combat areas that are basically just corridors leading you from one end to the next. "But Geth, you silly noob" some of you protest now, Mass Effect was like that too! And yes, you are right, Mass Effect was also just a long line of corridors, as most games area. But the difference is that in ME there were side areas to explore, multiple approaches to your destination (think Noverias three ways of getting past security) and the locations felt more "real". In ME2, your path is littered with doors that are sealed forever which only gives me a sense of claustrophobia. I don't feel like I am fighting my way through an office high rise, I feel as if I am shooting my way through a corridor.

Together, these two make the gameplay very repetitive along with the fact that there are obviously fewer side missions and less places to explore (even the planet side "exploration" usually only consists of running down a corrior to complete a mission). One playthrough is all you need to have experienced the story. And after that... Mass Effect 2 had lost its' appeal to me. The gunfighting just isn't good enough to stand against "real" shooters and the RPG elements are too bare bones to make up for it.

Does anyone else have similar experiences from ME2 or any other game? Maybe the complete opposite experience of ME2?

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

I played Mass Effect largely for the story, so the half decent RPG and shooter mechanics didn't bother me much.

I suppose sort of DOW2 had that effect on me... I preferred the original DOWs base building and was quite disappointed in it's removal from the sequel.

 

[Woodsey]

I too found myself unwilling to play ME2 again, but it couldn't be down to the combat since it was so much better than the first's (which I've played through like 5 times).

In the end, I realised it's because I don't want to see the other side of my choices and end up creating the "perfect" playthrough. I was happy with my decisions and I'd just have to wait for the next game.

6 months later though, and here I am doing a proper second playthrough. It's just too good.

 

[Anah'ya]

Narf.

This Taffer has the complete opposite experience with Mass Effect.

BioWare took it into the direction they'd apparently been shooting for since ME1 (faster paced combat, which is better suited for a Sci-Fi setting) and they've succeeded.
It's a game that actually made me chase the objective and feel the urgency of the Reaper/Collector threat, instead of spending hours upon hours chasing down insignificant side-quests or sitting in my ship customizing my g'damn weapons and armor.

This is Command Shepherd, not some errand boy/girl ready to do everyone's bidding for a warm handshake and some credits.

This Taffer likes what they did to Mass Effect 2 and cannot wait to see how they further improve on the experience with Mass Effect 3.

 

[LogicNProportion]

I think ME2 did some things worse, and some things better than it's predecessor.

I think the gunplay and ammo was a step in the right direction, while I think the exploration was destroyed.

Overall, I think the sequel was an improvement...but not by much.

 

[tzimize]

I have the complete opposite experience.

I have solved ME1 twice. Once when it came out, once later when I found out I could play the same character and use the decisions I made. While ME1 was awesome there was a few glaring faults. The inventory system was TERRIBLE and way too much work. The combat was like a bad fps. It felt to me like none of the abilities really stood out, and classes seemed similar in many ways.

ME2 I solved 5 times in a row if not more (I lost count at the end). It is one of the best experiences I have had on a PC, no more ENDLESS lists of useless machineguns to sell, a tighter story, classes that felt a lot more distinct and most with signature moves...ah...ME2.

I had a blast playing through as multiple classes and enjoyed stealth/charge/supergrenades etc. It was great. The fact that you could customize your suit was also a winning touch.

Playing a game on rails is not a bad thing as long as the rails are well hidden or extremely shiny and full of chrome. ME2 had a great story, a great cast and FUN gameplay (omitting the planetscanning). The combat was a lot faster and more exciting and this fitted me well.

ME2 is a clear 10 in my book and will stand as one of THE best games I have EVER played. I cant remember the last time I played through a game that many times. Maybe...diablo 2 or something.

 

[D_987]

I completely agree; it just felt that in "stream-lining" the experience Mass Effect 2 lost a lot of its charm - the environments didn't feel wide and open, they felt confined and needless linear. Even the cities were separated through doors and there was no long corridors to give you the sense you were inside a large space station, as was the case in the previous game.

Perhaps the most obvious change was The Citadel and how butchered that experience had become. In the first game The citadel was magnificent - it was large, open, and felt connected. Yet in Mass Effect 2 you're restricted to a few basic corridors that feel like they each have a specific purpose and that's all.

Obviously there are other issues; mainly in the upgrade system, the character morality and the storyline; but for me the big issue was the loss of perspective; the feeling that you were actually exploring and impacting the galaxy; I kinda miss those elevators...

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

Yeah, i managed to get bored with it before beating it even once and i've made it to level 60 on mass effect 1. I think it's because i just don't like whats been done to the universe as much. Since joining Cerberus everyone tends to treat you like shit. everything you did in the first game seems to have been forgotten or dismissed by most folks. I do like some of the new characters but the main story just doens't have the same appeal to me as the epic battle of the first, granted i'm only about half done with ME2 but ME1 had me by the balls by the time i got out of the citidel...so i guess somewhere along the way the magic got a bit lost.

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

I enjoyed ME2, I thought it was a good game (still better than most) but not great because of a lot of shortcomings. Most you mentioned, but others are less gameplay driven. I overall thought the gameplay improved, but they didn't do much with it other than throw in mercenaries every damn level for you to kill in waves (not including pure storyline levels). The combat is better, but they didn't vary it's application.

Again, like you said, overall the levels felt highly linear, but I feel a lot of the story was the same. There were choices to make, but nothing felt like it was having an impact, since it was localised to either one level or one conversation only. The exception to me was the choice in the Matriach's side-quest, but even then they put effort into making its results minimal. The first game had choices like trusting a deadly race to repopulate peacefully, who you'd save in a crisis, whether you'd give a known enemy a second chance etc. I'll admit that Legion kind of made me pause and think about things morally, but overall there was less that made me wonder if I'd done the right thing or not.

I also missed the characters chatting with each other like they did in elevators in ME1, they felt more interchangeable without it. I liked the characters more than the first, I just wish they had more of a presence when they were in your squad, but not central to the mission. In ME1, I'd always have characters with me that I liked personally or that would have interesting reactions to whatever I thought I'd be doing, in ME2 I didn't get that feedback so I just stuck with stats.

Also the loyalty thing seemed way too binary. You do a mission, and they're loyal. You don't do it, and they're not. That just seems...wrong to me.

Anyway, the game was good, but didn't have the same impact as the first. Although the last level was surprisingly enjoyable, it felt like the game suffered from focussing on repetetive combat more than the RPG elements and immersion.

Kind of rambled, but I just had this talk with someone soooo yeah...

 

[VulakAerr]

Complete opposite experience to me. I actually went back to ME1 after a couple of playthroughs of ME2 and whilst I still love it to death, I did find it very frustrating and the lack of polish got to me. The exploration missions were 25% fun 75% tedious. The Mako controls still irk me to this day and the story progression isn't quite as well-judged.

The second game remains my favourite game ever. It's polished, the combat has better ebb and flow. No Mako to piss me off. I'm not the biggest fan of the Hammerhead and I think with a bit of tweaking the Mako would be a much better vehicle, but of the two as they stand, the Hammerhead is easier to use at the moment. The story of the second game feels very much more personal. The characters are better-written. Even Jack, my least-liked character gets a hefty chunk of sympathy from me. And as great as the finale of ME1 was

Spoiler

the view of climbing the outside of Citadel tower as Sovereign steps further and further towards you will stay with me forever

Mass Effect 2's finale pushed everything to 11, or maybe 20. Everything from the

Spoiler

attack on the Normandy SR-2 up to the end of the game

had me on the edge of my seat. I've never felt such a thrill playing a game as during that finale and it was thrilling and touching at the same time. There was less exploration, I'll grant you, but to me that just kept a tighter story. It surpassed all my expectations and I'm still stunned at the emotional attachment the characters present to the player.

 

[PauL o_O]

Not something that needed to be brought up IMO, because everything you just said was extremely obvious. They stressed time and time again that they were kicking out the old RPG esque way of things and turning it into a more linear shooter for a wider spectrum of players. You'll get over it.

 

[Meggiepants]

Well, as many people are already saying, Bioware spiffed up a few bits of ME2, but they then lost the quality of some of the other aspects.

I much preferred being able to fully explore a city like the Citadel then what they did with ME2, where most places were off limits unless you were doing a mission there. It made the cities seem far smaller that they were supposed to be. As I once said in another thread long ago, I'd have liked to walk around a city like Omega or Ilium.

But, the fighting in ME2 was much more refined. Although it did feel more like a shooter, that was a good thing, as it wasn't quite so clunky anymore.

There were things I liked and disliked about both ME and ME2, but I do think ME2 played just a little bit better.

 

[the_pleasure_is_mine]

I suppose sort of DOW2 had that effect on me... I preferred the original DOWs base building and was quite disappointed in it's removal from the sequel.

Just out of curiosity, have you tried Chaos Rising yet? Yeah it still does not have the base building and is not quite as awesome as the original DoW + WA but it did fix a lot of DoW2s problems. The missions are all now actually unique, not just "Go to the yellow ring and defeat big bad" or "Defend this same spot against 5 waves of enemies for the 500th time"
It is actually pretty damn good.

Yes I bought it about two weeks ago actually. Unfortunately I spend most of my time either on Xbox Live or on MSN so I haven't advanced very far in the Chaos Rising story. But I have enjoyed it so far and all the new tweaks (corruption is a good addition).

 

[Echo136]

I have the complete opposite experience.

I have solved ME1 twice. Once when it came out, once later when I found out I could play the same character and use the decisions I made. While ME1 was awesome there was a few glaring faults. The inventory system was TERRIBLE and way too much work. The combat was like a bad fps. It felt to me like none of the abilities really stood out, and classes seemed similar in many ways.

ME2 I solved 5 times in a row if not more (I lost count at the end). It is one of the best experiences I have had on a PC, no more ENDLESS lists of useless machineguns to sell, a tighter story, classes that felt a lot more distinct and most with signature moves...ah...ME2.

I had a blast playing through as multiple classes and enjoyed stealth/charge/supergrenades etc. It was great. The fact that you could customize your suit was also a winning touch.

Playing a game on rails is not a bad thing as long as the rails are well hidden or extremely shiny and full of chrome. ME2 had a great story, a great cast and FUN gameplay (omitting the planetscanning). The combat was a lot faster and more exciting and this fitted me well.

ME2 is a clear 10 in my book and will stand as one of THE best games I have EVER played. I cant remember the last time I played through a game that many times. Maybe...diablo 2 or something.

Im going to be a lazy bastard and avoid a lengthy explaination by saying I had the same experience as you. Dunno why everyone's complaining that the game was changed too much. I personally think it was changed for the better.

 

[ironduke88]

Honestly I prefered the first one. I liked the inventory system, its not that different to other RPG inventories (in fact you end up with alot less shite than you do in say, the elder scrolls series) and the distinct lack of upgrades in MEII felt like I couldn't really prepare for what I was about to encounter which lost some of the immersion.
The story was better in the first one, for the love of everything working for cerebus ruined the story of MEII for me, especially as I roled survivor and cerebus was responsible for the ambush and ruining my characters life...
The only thing that I actually prefered in the second one was how that final mission worked, that was an amazing climax, slightly ruined by the stupidity of the story ending.

Don't get me wrong they were both great games, as one expects from Bioware, and I enjoyed them both. I just think if your a more RPG orientated kind of person, like me, then you'll prefer the first one as the whole lumbering, complicated, buggyness doesn't really bother me any more.

 

[The Lunatic]

I preferred the first one really.

Much more customization in terms of equipment and roles, the inventory and upgrade system was a whole load better and the skills felt much more interesting.

I kind of fell the Second was dumbed down to fit the shooter crowd more. A few too many plot holes caused by it too.

Such as...

Spoiler: Information about side mission and some plot points.

You land near an abandoned ship which Jacob's father used to pilot, it explains that the ship has been there for a very long time. However, when you encounter enemies, they are using heat clips, technology only put into use after Shepard died. How is this possible?

 

[DeadMix]

I prefer ME1's story, and everything else about ME2.

 

[Bayushi_Kouya]

WTF faster-paced combat? ME1 has fast paced combat! A fight starts, you whip out your guns, sling your powers and one party or the other goes down. In ME2, you spend all your time hiding behind chest-high walls and occasionally popping your head out to squeeze off two shots or a three-round burst before ducking again. Combat in ME1 was fulfilling. Combat in ME2 is a chore.

Also, I agree with the OP about the combat. ME1 had a unique feel to it, ME2 feels like Gears of War with psychic powers and enemies with obnoxious shields rather than absurd amounts of health.

I've never understood this 'dumb it down for teh noobie-boobies' approach to sequels. Anyone who's there for the tactical aspect of the game is going to be sorely disappointed, given that they have Capt. Bullet Sponge and his lovely assistant Bullet Sham-Wow as teammates for the early game, and their likely desire to skip all the talking and get to the shooting will result in their entire team getting killed at the end. This is not a positive game experience. Yeah, you may get their money, but they're going to talk bad about you until the end of days for that bait-and-switch.

 

[PoliceBox63]

I didn't enjoy my second playthrough that much because yes it was extremely repetetive even when I was doing renegade actions. I never remember ME1 being like that.

 

[thegrimfandango]

I'd prefer more exploration, sidequests and RPG elements tbh. Planet scanning doesn't bother me, but maybe I havn't played long enough to get bored of it yet.
I don't like the mission end screens, or the fact you don't get exp until you've finished a mission.
But I admit, I'm not a player of shooters, I'm not really enjoying the combat in ME2, and I suck hard at it and keep running out of medi-gel so that definitely colours my opinion. I keep playing because I love the universe, the dialogue and characters, but I'm afraid I won't see the end of this one because I'm not much cop at fast-paced shooting.
If it had the combat system for Dragon Age where you can pause, queue up abilities and make clear tactical decisions, I'd love it. As it is I'm usually trying to run desperately to cover, wondering where the fuck my allies have run to, why none of my powers seem to have decent range or effectiveness against the enemies I'm fighting, and why they won't get out of the way of direct fire. If they do take cover they've a tendency to sit behind it miles away and not shoot at anything, so I'm pretty much getting my ass handed to me, even on easy