Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Oh man, you guys too much for me to read at this time.

I liked mass effect 1 better for a couple reasons. I liked that it had a more standardized and customizable inventory than ME2, that is a big part of RPGs. That is not to say ME1 had a good inventory and customization system, it wasnt very good, but it was better than nothing.

Some people had good points about the mako, it was a fun idea, but the maps were baaaaaad. If they had put some more work into it, it could have been really fun. I had imagined driving it to be like the warthog in halo, and it could have been that fun, if the maps didnt suck.

Honestly, they were both good, but ME2 didnt add anything new and interesting the way ME1 did. The sequels of original games just arent ever going to be as good as the original.

Slightly OT, but the thing that I've found funny about the release on PS3, is that all of the reviews given by IGN have said that it is a much better game on PS3, but it go 9.5, as opposed to 9.6 for the Xbox version

Looking back on both games, I prefer ME2 to ME, however, at the time, I really, really enjoyed ME.

All things being equal I enjoyed the experience of playing ME more than I did the experience of ME2, even though ME2 was a lot more polished and had many improved features over ME.

KingKodo wrote:Oh man, you guys too much for me to read at this time.

I liked mass effect 1 better for a couple reasons. I liked that it had a more standardized and customizable inventory than ME2, that is a big part of RPGs. That is not to say ME1 had a good inventory and customization system, it wasnt very good, but it was better than nothing.

Some people had good points about the mako, it was a fun idea, but the maps were baaaaaad. If they had put some more work into it, it could have been really fun. I had imagined driving it to be like the warthog in halo, and it could have been that fun, if the maps didnt suck.

Honestly, they were both good, but ME2 didnt add anything new and interesting the way ME1 did. The sequels of original games just arent ever going to be as good as the original.

Well, that's a little biased.

imo, Age of Empires 2 > Age of Empires, Jedi Outcast > Dark Forces 2, KotOR 2 > KotOR1, Warcraft 3 > Warcraft 2, Morrowind > Daggerfall, BF2 > BF, and so forth.

Goliath wrote:Slightly OT, but the thing that I've found funny about the release on PS3, is that all of the reviews given by IGN have said that it is a much better game on PS3, but it go 9.5, as opposed to 9.6 for the Xbox version

That's because IGN has changed from a 100 point scale to a 20 point scale.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:

KingKodo wrote:Oh man, you guys too much for me to read at this time.

I liked mass effect 1 better for a couple reasons. I liked that it had a more standardized and customizable inventory than ME2, that is a big part of RPGs. That is not to say ME1 had a good inventory and customization system, it wasnt very good, but it was better than nothing.

Some people had good points about the mako, it was a fun idea, but the maps were baaaaaad. If they had put some more work into it, it could have been really fun. I had imagined driving it to be like the warthog in halo, and it could have been that fun, if the maps didnt suck.

Honestly, they were both good, but ME2 didnt add anything new and interesting the way ME1 did. The sequels of original games just arent ever going to be as good as the original.

Well, that's a little biased.

imo, Age of Empires 2 > Age of Empires, Jedi Outcast > Dark Forces 2, KotOR 2 > KotOR1, Warcraft 3 > Warcraft 2, Morrowind > Daggerfall, BF2 > BF, and so forth.

Sequels to video games are usually better. (However KOTOR 2 is not an example of that).

As for the story not being as good: It's the middle part of a trilogy. It's very difficult to write the second act, give them some leeway. Although I didn't like it as much as ME1 I did still like it. The character developement is very strong regardless.

KotOR 2 is the most underrated RPG ever made because everyone likes to trip on about KotOR's uninspired twist that is cool for about 5 minutes.

Amaya wrote:KotOR 2 is the most underrated RPG ever made because everyone likes to trip on about KotOR's uninspired twist that is cool for about 5 minutes.

No, KOTOR2 has no ending. Production was just abruptly stopped because its not even a Bioware game. I liked KOTOR a lot but I do not like KOTOR 2 at all.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Amaya wrote:KotOR 2 is the most underrated RPG ever made because everyone likes to trip on about KotOR's uninspired twist that is cool for about 5 minutes.

No, KOTOR2 has no ending. Production was just abruptly stopped because its not even a Bioware game. I liked KOTOR a lot but I do not like KOTOR 2 at all.

KotOR 2 has an ending. It leaves out some details, but those have been added in fan made patches.

KotOR is a pretty simple story. The people who dislike KotOR2 don't get it or like to go on about the bugs and cut content (not as bad as people claim) and how the story is too depressing.

The fact Fans had to make their own endings kinda proves my point.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:The fact Fans had to make their own endings kinda proves my point.

/sigh

They didn't make their own endings.

1) There is an ending in the game. It is rushed.
2) The fan made content is them adding CUT CONTENT (ie stuff made by Obdsidian, not fans) to the game.
3) The journey is more important than the ending. I'd rather explore a meaningful world than do a vision quest to stop the ultimate evil for the 500th time.

What I said is not bias, just my opinion, and the opinion of many of my friends. Oblivion is widely considered inferior to Morrowind, DOD and CS are generally considered to be better than the source versions (although I dont like any of them).

Lets shift the genre to movies and look at the matrix. I have heard many MANY people say that the first matrix was the best, and the rest sucked. I do not totally agree that they sucked, but I do prefer the first more.

It is not true for all games, but it is more apparent in games that are "revolutionary" such as Mass Effect, or WoW or many many others.

I think alot of people tend to compare games and forget that they came out years apart. Try going back to when you first played Age of Empires 1 and compare that experience with the one you had when you played Age of Empires 2 or 3. It is obviously very difficult, but if you can, you may have a very different view on things.

Most games that get sequels are pretty impressive themselves. And most sequels worth arguing about bring something new to the franchise. You can't just say the sequel is better just because the developers learned from mistakes made in the first go around or polished things up as technology improved. Nor can you say that the sequel is worse just because it isn't as fresh and innovative as the first game. Using the Elder Scrolls example, I haven't seen many people arguing that Daggerfall was better than Morrowind even if they do think that Morrowind was better than Oblivion.

Debating it over the last few days has made me realize that judging between the ME games is very difficult. ME1 really wowed me because I liked the setting so much. My main memory of playing ME2 was that I felt let down. But I can see that a few factors heavily influenced that feeling. For one thing, I had just been severely disappointed by DA:O and wasn't happy with BioWare generally. For another, I was pushing through gameplay too quickly because I wanted to see what had been done with the characters I loved from ME1. To some extent, I can see KingKondo's point: great games are capable of creating unreasonable expectations for their sequels. But whether a game can live up to unreasonable expectations is surely not a good way to measure whether it's good or not -- nor is it really an appropriate measuring stick when deciding whether you like a game or its sequel better.

Ironically everthing Bioware changed for ME2 was at the fans request. I've never seen a company take criticisms so seriously. Now they are taking criticism for making those changes. I hope they've learned you can't please all the people all the time, to coin a phrase.

Amaya wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Amaya wrote:KotOR 2 is the most underrated RPG ever made because everyone likes to trip on about KotOR's uninspired twist that is cool for about 5 minutes.

No, KOTOR2 has no ending. Production was just abruptly stopped because its not even a Bioware game. I liked KOTOR a lot but I do not like KOTOR 2 at all.

KotOR 2 has an ending. It leaves out some details, but those have been added in fan made patches.

KotOR is a pretty simple story. The people who dislike KotOR2 don't get it or like to go on about the bugs and cut content (not as bad as people claim) and how the story is too depressing.

Oh please, the ending of KotOR 2 was basically "Oh hey, your on this planet thing. No real way you got here, you were here, and now suddenly your there with NO explenation of how...."

Now, as for 1 and 2, what I liked about one was:

You started as a basic dude and became a jedi.

What I liked about 2 was:

Everyone became a jedi, didn't have to make the same team over and over.
Plot was better (except the ending)
Sleeps-With-Vibroblades is pretty bad ass, except for the ending where he basically just suicides...

I did like ME 1 btw, will probably run through it again, for achievements at the very least. Only got the Quarrian team member one for example.

However I'm totaly lost to ME 2 now, the story parts to the game seem even more intense and I am loving the new characters.

Trying to earn the loyalty of each member is a sub game in its self, and I'm spending much more time checking in of them to see if new conversation pathways open up.

On a side note, did the fact I had max Charm in the first game carry over, or is it just connected to Paragon now? I ask as I am still getting Charisma conversation options even there appears to be no stat for it.

Charm and Intimidate are just connected to Paragon and Renegade values. There's only 3 parts of the game that I can think of that having a low Paragon/Renegade score would keep you from doing anything.

That's good and bad. There doesn't seem to be any benefit in not going all the way on one end or another of that spectrum. Or did I miss a "actually, I'm totally neutral" option?

I don't want to get to technical but one of the worse things about ME2 is how the Morality math works behind the scenes. It doesn't accumulate by addition.
For example: 2 paragon + 2 paragon = 4 paragon. therefore I may do a conversation option that requires 4 paragon points. Which is what most people assume.

It works on a decaying percentage which I mean in lay terms. So you start the game at 100% paragon. If you pick 1 paragon action you will have then 100% Paragon and 0% Renegade. So then the hardest moments of convinving in the game will usually require 75% paragon or 75% Renegade.
Unfortunately the worst thing you can do is pick the neutral option. Never do that! You will lose both Paragon and Renegade points. It's a dumb system that does not encourage nuance and roleplaying but just trying to max out your Paragon or renegade.

Now, many of you ME1 players will indeed carry over your Paragon points (anybody really play renegade?) and if you import your save will actually be starting at like 600% Paragon or something like that. So that's a nice buffer.
If you wish to kep the loyalty of all your crewmate which is required to not have them die I strongly recomend doing Zaheed's loyalty mission first. Jack and Miranda have a falling out and you need high something to do that so that is also a high priority. Tali's mission is also a recommended if you want a happy ending.

You can save every crew member even the extras but there's a bit of a science to it.

Amaya wrote:But first, the obvious!

The Mako

First, last and the only one you have to write about. How to make a 30h hour game last twice that? Ride a booooooriiiiing (in Homer Simpson voice), pain in the ass vehicle. Everything around you looks like graphics from 1999 low budget game. Finding quests was not fun, and didn't take ANY focus from you. Just riding at least 5 minutes from one end af a map to another.
Fighting in mako? Really cool if you want to hold your mouse pressed for another 10 minutes and once every 5 seconds tap forward or backward key to successfully dodge all missiles.

I really liked ME2 better. Gameplay was super fun, fast, and not boring at all. Plot, characters, and some other stuff was a bit worse? Who cares, I had FUN playing it. Very similar in style to the first one, but with enhanced battle experience. And the fighting should be fast paced, and interesting in a shooter. There are many other reasons but this is the main

I just need to tell you that the drell is in my opinion one. of. THE. worse. characters. ever. After hearing him for 30 seconds there was not a single conversation I didn't skip. He was just a huge ball of turd assassin clishe. I really really really screwed up my game and let him live. Normally I'd be the first to put a bullet in his flashback, """""""""""cool""""""""""" (there is no enough quotation marks in the world to represent how awful he iw), dying ass. Even with 100% paragon.

Plot, characters, and some other stuff was a bit worse? Who cares

People who like plot and characters?

(I agree about the Drell, however.)

What the heck is KotOR? What does that stand for? (I have been wondering that forever, but just now got around to asking )

GalacticDefender wrote:What the heck is KotOR? What does that stand for? (I have been wondering that forever, but just now got around to asking )

knights of the old republic: A Star Wars D&D Video game. The coming together of 3 geeks worlds.

Manchu wrote:

Plot, characters, and some other stuff was a bit worse? Who cares

People who like plot and characters?

(I agree about the Drell, however.)

Thane was the hottest male LI in the game. No homo.

my gf think's he's romantic

Jacob was cool until he shows up and does his creepy "The prize!" speech.



Assuming The Prize

Random question: How can Shepard die in ME2? Does he not always make the jump to the Normandy or what?

Amaya wrote:

Spoiler:

Do no loyalty missions and get no upgrades.

I believe thats the method if you want everyone to die (more or less). To get Shepard to die, don't you just have too:

Total results for this poll and http://www.thenexusforums.com/index.php?/topic/291666-mass-effect-2-is-better-than-mass-effect/ so far:

Mass Effect 14
Mass Effect 2 37
I liked both equally 17
I have not played both 11

This is an extremely small sample size, but I am very surprised at the results so far.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Goliath wrote:Slightly OT, but the thing that I've found funny about the release on PS3, is that all of the reviews given by IGN have said that it is a much better game on PS3, but it go 9.5, as opposed to 9.6 for the Xbox version

That's because IGN has changed from a 100 point scale to a 20 point scale.

That doesn't make any sense. Why does them changing the point scale explain why the game got reviewed better on the ps3 but got given a lower score than the xbox version?