Mass effect 2 and Dying True Rpgs

[The Transcendent One]

Am i the only one dissapointed by Mass effect 2?

Mass effect 1 was a flawed game with rpg elements,the combat was bad,but the story,characters,great villains,choices,you had the freedom to choose what to level .

Mass effect 2 had good combat,Bad story with severe plotholes,was dumbed down,Gears of war clone, i already have gears of war,i want Mass effect 2 like Mass Effect but Perfected.

The ilusive man pays 4 billion dolars on shepard resurrection and builds the new normandy,yet he doesn t give the goddamn resources you have to scan for minerals.

Attention Spoilers-how the hell did mordin captured a collector bug,what the hell does the crew of shepard when he isn t there?!!?

Bioware disapointed me for the first time,now dragon age 2 will be dumbed down too.

Are Rpgs a dying breed you dont see in this generation rpgs like Fallout,Fallout 2,planescape torment,Arcanum.

PS:Sorry for my english

Edited September 3, 2010 by The Transcendent One

[Tale]

I disagree with pretty much everything you said. ME 2 improved on everything of value from ME1. ME1 didn't have anything intelligent to dumb down to begin with.

 

ME2 was no smarter, but at least the characters were likeable and the game itself was fun. Half the people I know wish they could have nuked both Kaidan and Ashley.

 

I don't really see how ME2's plotholes are any worse than the first's. The entire concept of Spectres itself is a plothole. No oversight, no pay, no supplies. What kind of operation are they running there?

Edited September 3, 2010 by Tale

[Kaftan Barlast]

Am i the only one dissapointed by Mass effect 2?

Mass effect 1 was a flawed game with rpg elements,the combat was bad,but the story,characters,great villains,choices,you had the freedom to choose what to level .

Mass effect 2 had good combat,Bad story with severe plotholes,was dumbed down,Gears of war clone, i already have gears of war,i want Mass effect 2 like Mass Effect but Perfected.

The ilusive man pays 4 billion dolars on shepard resurrection and builds the new normandy,yet he doesn t give the goddamn resources you have to scan for minerals.

Attention Spoilers-how the hell did mordin captured a collector bug,what the hell does the crew of shepard when he isn t there?!!?

Bioware disapointed me for the first time,now dragon age 2 will be dumbed down too.

Are Rpgs a dying breed you dont see in this generation rpgs like Fallout,Fallout 2,planescape torment,Arcanum.

PS:Sorry for my english

 

 

 

TL;DR

[Hurlshort]

I don't think it is the English, so much as the lack of spaces in between words. Is your space bar not working right?

 

I'm pretty sure I disagree though. Mass Effect was very good and ME2 improved on quite a few aspects of the original. I'm excited to see how they wrap it up.

[HoonDing]

ME2 didn't really have a story, it was purely about gathering a bunch of psychologically stunted (but bad-ass) companions, fixing their personal issues by clicking through ten dialogue options and defeat the bad guys in ten minutes.

 

For ME3 I sincerely hope BioWare will include a bad ending where certain past renegade choices lead to either a Reaper victory, or a universe where the Illusive Man install himself as God-Emperor using the technology from the Collector base.

Edited September 3, 2010 by virumor

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

ME2 pretty much ruined whatever ME1 started in terms of plot. Reapers were pretty much retconned into idiots and overall the story didn't move anywhere. As for the station, why anyone would ever be dumb enough to blow it up is beyond me (I mean, come on, you need it as proof that Reapers exist at least).

 

ME1 lacked 2's polish but it had a few things more, mainly an actual antagonist.

[Tale]

The Reapers weren't idiots to begin with? Supposedly the only reason Sovereign was defeated was because he decided to joyride in whatshisbrainwashedname. Smart move, idiot. You've an invincible superweapon, but you're going to hop around in the guy who's already dead's body.

Edited September 3, 2010 by Tale

[sorophx]

I still think ME was KOTOR2 in disguise. same kind of BS with a different flavor.

 

now, ME2 improved the part where you have to drive a tractor, making it disappear. but planet scan isn't much better. the secondary missions had to go so they did, for the most part, thank god. I do agree, that the story is boring and doesn't make much sense, but when did Bio know how to write a good story?

 

anyway, ME was not very good, ME2 is slightly better, but I personally enjoyed Alpha Protocol more.

[Starwars]

I never saw the greatness of ME1, I think it's a pretty bad game overall.

The gameplay of ME2 is not the direction I would've wanted myself (I would've liked more RPG and less action myself) but I think it *is* an improvement on ME1. ME1 was to me one of the worst examples of gameplay being "stuck in the middle" between action and RPG. Like I said, I would've preferred a strong push towards the RPG side, but I think the most important part was that it *got* a push at all.

 

But, while I think the ME1 plot was extremely boring... The way ME2 continues it is just horrendous. For all the talk of ME always being planned as a trilogy, it sure feels as if they had *no* idea where to take the plot in the second game. It's terrible.

 

That said, the companions (which are sort of the stars of ME2) are much better and a generally fun bunch to interact with.

 

Overall, I had quite a bit of fun with ME2 on my first playthrough. But when I tried replaying it, I... well, I didn't really like it anymore. It was a really fun ride once but once that was over, I didn't find any more enjoyment in it.

[Tigranes]

I'm sure this is terribly hypocritical of me, so I'll think about it more later, but my gut feeling to all this has always been.... ME1 and ME2 are both pot and kettle in the same basket of a particular RPG genre. I find it silly to detest one and love the other.

 

I mean, think about it. From the very beginning, the hallmarks of ME were (a) feel-good space opera story with weird-looking exotic sci-fi locales and with some 80's influences, (b) combat that tries to hit the middle ground blend between squad combat, tactics, shooter games and visceral action, © and in support of those two elements, where appropriate, traditional Biowarian RPG elements.

 

As far as I can tell ME2 simply 'optimised' the model further. Those displeased by ME2, I'd argue, weren't actually happy with ME1 because they loved this model; they liked ME1 because it provided enough of ©, which is what they really wanted, with (a) and (b) as unique elements. On the other hand, those who think ME2 is a clear improvement recognised, or came to like, the ME model for what it is.

 

I think it's all fine, ME does what it does very very well even if I can't care less for it. THe only concern I have is that instead of establishing its own niche or something, it's coming to become the representative and referent halllmark of all RPGs, which is surely going to influence production of other RPGs (see DA2).

[Niten_Ryu]

Bioware get's away with all kinds of weird design choices like removing ability to jump or crouch whenever player feels like it. They know modern gaming audience really well. I'm more focused on game mechniancs and world design rather then story elements but it's safe to say that EA's and Bioware's massive resources on various areas and they rarely take risks without focus testing it or researching recent trends. ME2 was success with masses and in the end, that's what matters for 'em.

[sorophx]

it's coming to become the representative and referent halllmark of all RPGs, which is surely going to influence production of other RPGs (see DA2).

 

I just hope not all RPGs, period, but Bio RPGs only

Edited September 3, 2010 by sorophx

[Rostere]

Bioware get's away with all kinds of weird design choices like removing ability to jump or crouch whenever player feels like it.

 

Since when does the PC in RPGs have the ability to jump or crouch whenever they feel like? I don't think it's that weird.

[Oblarg]

ME was a perfectly fine game. Engaging plot, passable combat, fantastic setting. The characters, however, were dull and 1-dimensional (with the possible exception of Saren), and the RPG mechanics were clunky and poorly implemented (wonky inventory, LOADS of duplicate items, not enough visible impact on performance, stupid dialogue choices). Still, I enjoyed it.

 

ME2 had notably better characters, some of whom had backstories I was actually interested in. The dialogue was improved, with the exception of the main character's lines which were still pretty godawful. Unfortunately, ME2 suffers from an incredibly shoddy plot which is left in complete shambles by the end of the game. There was also a fairly bad change in art direction, going from smooth and slick, bloom-filled, wondrous sci-fi to dark and drab with a serious lack of colors, which severely cramped the great feel first game's setting had. BioWare also threw out most of the RPG mechanics rather than fixing them, resulting in Gears of War-in-space gameplay which I don't particularly care for. Oh, and the biotics went from feeling badass to feeling completely ****ing irrelevant (almost every character has biotics for seemingly no reason, and the powers themselves were toned way down and lacked the visceral feel that they had in the first game). In fact, abilities in general sort of turned into a "shoot a colored missile at target," and the global cooldown sucked.

 

Overall, I'd say ME1 is the better game by far.

Edited September 3, 2010 by Oblarg

[Wrath of Dagon]

Mass effect 1 ...,but the story,characters,great villains,choices,

You have just forfeited your right to complain about any game, ever.

[Pop]

But, while I think the ME1 plot was extremely boring... The way ME2 continues it is just horrendous. For all the talk of ME always being planned as a trilogy, it sure feels as if they had *no* idea where to take the plot in the second game. It's terrible.

Read or watched many trilogies lately? In terms of plot, the middle one's always soft.

[Jaesun]

What the problem is most people take Mass Effect's story/plot as SERIOUS BUSINESS, and it is not supposed to be. It's supposed to be more like a B rated Sci Fi space opera, which I feel it pulls off quite well. And the characters in ME2 were utterly fantastic and well written.

[Tale]

Mass Effect doesn't show a single hint of self-recognition for how cheesy and cliche driven it is. If it's not serious business, it at least thinks it is. It's not even that cheesy. If you want to look at something that really is supposed to be that way, look at Duke Nukem or large parts of Fallout. There's no sense of it laughing at itself.

 

If it really wanted to drive the B movie Space Opera point home, it'd have a gangster planet or guys wearing capes. It seems more like it's trying to be Wrath of Khan, just without any of the depth.

Edited September 4, 2010 by Tale

[Niten_Ryu]

Bioware get's away with all kinds of weird design choices like removing ability to jump or crouch whenever player feels like it.

 

Since when does the PC in RPGs have the ability to jump or crouch whenever they feel like? I don't think it's that weird.

 

Basically I see certain game features as evolution. In Doom you couldn't jump or crouch. World was true 2d and obviously FPS. Around the same time, Ultima Underworld offered more real 3d world (honestly I don't remember if you could jump in that game). Quake changed the game and gave us full 3d world. You could jump around as much as you wanted but crouch was nowhere to be seen. Around those days, more tactical turn based game like Jagged Alliance and X-Com allowed us to crouch, prone, and levitate / move up in ladders. Games were 2d, but had several height levels.

 

In time, features from different genres of games became common. Games like Call of Duty had jump / crouch / prone and Deus Ex (while no prone stance), allowed multiple solutions to how to enter certain place. You could sneak, use brute force or jump around and find alternitive entry into some place. Games like Thief series and Splinter Cell perfected the sneaking.

 

Few years later, Bioware merge their expertise in the area of the CRPGs with 15 years of FPS history. And what do they do? Against all predictions, they choose to skip many features and in the end, find out that they were absolutely right to do so. Not only they do it once in Mass Effect, but change game mechanics again in Mass Effect 2 (simplify even more). This means that their market research is top quality and they certainly know what majority of their players want. Like I said, I look game and combat mechanics (and the world aspect and rule system) the same way most look at story elements in this board (and other CRPG fanboards).

[Hurlshort]

I've never really seen a game come so close to making your decisions in the original game seem to have a real impact in the sequel. Given the raw amount of choices available, they did a fantastic job of showing consequences. It was also pretty obvious from an early point that ME2 was a bridge to the conclusion. It was a launch pad for the characters, and I'm guessing the third will have very few new faces but will be focused on wrapping up the plot.

[Gorth]

It was a launch pad for the characters DLC's, and I'm guessing the third will have very few new faces but will be focused on wrapping up the plot business concept.

Fixed >_

 

Never got into ME1, found it yawn inducing. Was the PC version better than the xbox360 version? I kind of liked ME2, especially some of the locales (Omega station) and some of the NPC's were interesting enough, the justicar and the mad scientist being my favourites. The combat was horrible though and thank you for reminding me of the planet scanning

[Maria Caliban]

ME1 didn't have anything intelligent to dumb down to begin with.

 

So true. Though ME1 had blue alien girly sex.

[GhostofAnakin]

ME2's main story was weak and pretty boring, but I enjoyed the party sidequests (though it could be argued that was actually the main point of the game).

 

ME1's main story was better, but ME2 did the party interactions and depth better.

 

All IMO.

[Starwars]

Read or watched many trilogies lately? In terms of plot, the middle one's always soft.

 

Of course. But I think the ME2 story goes beyond soft.

[Monte Carlo]

Mass Effect doesn't show a single hint of self-recognition for how cheesy and cliche driven it is. If it's not serious business, it at least thinks it is. It's not even that cheesy. If you want to look at something that really is supposed to be that way, look at Duke Nukem or large parts of Fallout. There's no sense of it laughing at itself.

 

If it really wanted to drive the B movie Space Opera point home, it'd have a gangster planet or guys wearing capes. It seems more like it's trying to be Wrath of Khan, just without any of the depth.

 

 

^ What Tale said.