{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Editado por Recon Number 54:
6/12/2013 10:51:31 PM
19
Let's face it, guys: Mass Effect 2 wasn't very good.
I'm not saying it was *terrible* but think about it:
-terrible color palette range
-side quests that lacked voice acting, dialogue options, choice
-simple, linear cities with very little to do
-the removal of inventory (not that ME1 had a good system, but it wasn't unfixable)
-the complete lack of a plot (you need to invade a homeworld, so you recruit 12 ground troops? why? and then you just blow up a base and it ends? what? what did we accomplish?)
-goofy, porno-quality romances with awkward animations
-complete segregation of gameplay and story (the combat and dialogue can only occur in the designated "combat" and "dialogue" sections)
-character is required to stick entirely either to paragon or renegade choices in order to save the whole team.
-antagonist has all the depth of Dr. Claw
-nonsensical ret-conning of lore in order to hastily justify awful gameplay changes (thermal clips)
-nonsensical, unexplainable technology simply to make the marketing more interesting (Shepard can be resurrected after suffocation + atmospheric reentry + impacting the surface of the planet)
-terminator baby boss
-a soundtrack that, while still good, has an action-movie feel rather than the utterly incredible science fiction soundtrack of ME1
Sure, the gameplay was more polished than ME1's, but it was also a lot more generic and sided more with third-person shooter elements over RPG elements. On the whole the game was a regression from ME1 that took away more than it added.
-
It was my first Mass Effect game I played and I enjoyed it.
-
Editado por Smarkdow: 6/12/2013 11:11:36 PMThe Arrival DLC did more to move the main plot of the series forward than Mass Effect 2 ever did. Mass Effect 2's main plot had little to do with the Reapers, you know, the main antagonist. In fact, Mass Effect 3's main plot suffered because Mass Effect 2 didn't do what it should have done. Mass Effect 1 was about discovering the Reaper threat. Mass Effect 2 should have been about finding a way to stop the Reapers. And Mass Effect 3 should have been about stopping the Reapers Instead, since Mass Effect 2 was about stopping the Collectors, Mass Effect 3 had to do a lot more and thus spread itself thin: Find a way to stop the Reapers (Crucible), gather allies, and then finally stop the Reapers. (Actually, Mass Effect 3 was more about stopping Cerberus than it was about defeating the Reapers) What the hell was the point of the Collectors, and why the hell were they the main antagonists of 2? Why kill Shepard in the beginning of the game, only to make his death meaningless and bring him back to life with a resurrection machine? Why is the Terminator-Reaper so ridiculously bad? If there's one good thing I'll say about Mass Effect 2, it's that it at least felt more like a Mass Effect game than 3 did. And I did like the portrayal of Cerberus and the Illusive Man as morally ambiguous, as opposed to the cartoon villain organization that Mass Effect 3 had.
-
4 RespostasMass Effect 3 was by far the best of the series, but people are just too butthurt about the ending to recognize the rest of the game.
-
5 RespostasEditado por BerzerkCommando: 6/13/2013 12:29:44 AMI didn't care for it either. I haven't played it in awhile, but here are the things I remember about it. -They removed the disc grenades. -You have less armors than the first game. -They removed armor upgrades. -They removed weapon upgrades. -The Citadel was disappointing. That cut scene of the upper area is just one big -blam!- you. -They got ride of exploration. In ME1 you can go to planets to collect resources and side quest. In ME@ you just send a probe to do the most boring mining thing ever. That's being really creative. -They got ride of the elevators. It was pointless gameplay wise, but you learned things about the characters and it was fun hearing them talk. They should have just gave the option to skip them instead of removing them.
-
1 ResponderME 2 is in my top 3 Xbox 360 games. It has a nice balance between ME1 and ME3. and to me it is the perfect example of what the ME universe is like.
-
Meh, I thought it was alright. Definitely not as good plot wise as ME1 tho.
-
My main issues with the game was that overall there was a severe lack in choice as far as weapons were concerned and that you couldn't really pick and choose who you wanted on your squad without either coming out with less than the maximum number or having to buy DLC characters.
-
I loved Mass Effect 2. I've loved all the Mass Effects, even 3 once all of the DLC came out.
-
1 ResponderI think it handled the characters way better in ME2. Look at Garrus, Legion, Tali, Joker, Mordin, Miranda (as much as I dislike her personally, she's a strong character), EDI and the others i can't be bothered to list. Sure, some were lackluster like Samara/Morinth and Jacob, but the majority were memorable and at least rather interesting. Despite Garrus being my favourite character he wasn't all that great in ME1, same with Tali (Though Tali's over rated as all hell). Only Ashley was a decent character. Wrex, too. I also feel it did a great job of expanding on the actual universe, with more races and planets to explore and interact with. The codex offered tons more information than what we saw in ME1, too. So while ME1 is probably my favourite, ME2 is still a solid Mass Effect game. ME3 has it's issues, but it was still a great game in my eyes, if a little restrictive with the auto-dialogue... but -blam!-, that ending. Still haven't gotten over that.
-
1 ResponderI'm guessing you've seen smudboy's videos. Anyway, in my honest opinion, despite ME2 having a fair few writing problems, it made up for it as a game. Things like the squad, the variety of hub worlds, the side-quests, the suicide mission and the dialogue options (ME1 often had multiple dialogue options that resulted in the exact same line, while ME3 almost removed roleplaying completely). That's my stance on it, anyway.
-
8 RespostasI view that Mass Effect trilogy as quite similar to the Star Wars trilogy (you know the ones that didn't give everyone AIDS). The first game placed you in a world full of deep intriguing lore which ultimately left you wanting more (like A new Hope) however the gameplay was a bit crap (like the CGI). The second one had the atmosphere dimmed due to it being essentially more of the same, instead there was a lot more character development which can be argued to have weakened the plot (Think plot of Empire Strikes Back- not really that indepth?). And the third, well, it's the ending that nobody really wanted/understood. (Teddy bears? Seriously?) /Opinion.
-
2 RespostasMass Effect 2 was pretty much filler to introduce characters and set up for Mass Effect 3.
-
2 RespostasHmm so what do you think of ME3?
-
2 RespostasEditado por kgj: 6/12/2013 10:52:48 PMlol@ME2plot lolevenmore@ME3everything
-
Nope, it was great
-
5 RespostasDisliked. Going to check your history, if you said Halo had a good story, you're going on mute.
-
13 RespostasYou stay the hell away from my Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 2 was the best game of the series, and one of the best games of the year, and I will fight you to the death in the streets over this.
-
OP lets face it I loved Mass Effect 2.
-
but muh bioware
