Mass Effect 2 is better than Mass Effect

[Amayakyrol]

I'm posting this because I am sick and tired of people going on and on about how bad and overrated Mass Effect 2 and how much better Mass Effect is than its sequel. I'm tired of people complaining about how trivial gameplay aspects (inventory, looting enemies) apparently make or break an RPG. Mass Effect 2 is an excellent game, it may just be the best single player game ever made. It is easily the most fun I've had gaming in years. It combines the action of a TPS with the storytelling and character development of the best RPGs and tosses in some cool elements suck as the new Paragon and Renagade quicktime events. If you dislike the game because its a TPS and not a traditional TBC D&D clone that's fine. Not everyone enjoys every game, but knocking it and claiming that is less of a game because of that is asinine.

 

To those who disliked Mass Effect, I recomment that you play ME2. It removes a lot of the poor elements of the original, improves combat, and is ultimately a much more polished game. The weakest aspect of the game is the mining mini game, but you don't have to invest any time in that if you do not desire. The amount of time needed to spend mining is minimal and is by no means enough to ruin the game.

 

Note: This based on the PC version of both games.

 

Points of Contention

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

But first, the obvious!

 

The Mako

 

The majority of Mass Effect players disliked the Mako. I disliked it for three reasons. The controls for it are poor, the planets you explore with the Mako are bland, cut and paste worlds, and the Mako takes away from the overall game experience. I did not purchase Mass Effect in order to drive a vehicle around in lifeless worlds. I don't think anyone else did either. If you want to include vehicles, make them secondary. The Mako shouldn't be required for Feros, Therum, Noveria, Ilos, Virmire, and many of the side missions. The Firewalker DLC was a big improvement. I hope that ME3 either avoids vehicles or makes them a secondary element

 

Graphics

 

Obviously, the improvement of graphics from Mass Effect to ME2 wasn't huge. There was a moderate improvement, but more importantly ME2 looks better AND runs better than Mass Effect. I call that a win.

 

And now the issues!

 

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

 

The first problem with this claim is that there is no accepted definition of what makes an RPG. Is an RPG simly a D&D clone? If you use this definition than neither Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 is an RPG. If you think an RPG needs an inventory system, excessive and useless talents, lootable enemies, and XP from every kill, than Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG.

I'd like to think that the most important element of an RPG is the development of your character. The most important aspect of character development is not leveling up. The most important element is how your character impacts the story and the world around him/her. The key difference between RPGs and most non RPGs is that you have many more choices in an RPG. No one can make a logical argument that Mass Effect 2 lacks character development in that you are capable of making a myriad choices that effect the story, the world around you, your squadmates, and of course, your character.

 

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

 

This assumes that Mass Effect has a good story, which it does not. Mass Effect's story is not original. The issue is not that the story of an ancient evil reappearing is common, but that those plot elements have been done to death in Bioware games. Mass Effect's strength lies in it's presentation and universe.

Mass Effect 2 lacks an original main quest and contains an element that I extremely dislike. Now, I like the fact that the 'suicide mission' is something that Bioware hasn't done before. In fact, I can't even really think of a game with a similar premise, but I'm sure there are some. My biggest issue is not that the Reapers are revealed to be essentially giant cyborgs, but that anyone thought making that hideous Human-Reaper out human mush was a good idea. Seriously, why did it have it look like a giant terminator with human larvea for eyes?

Back on topic, yes, I agree that ME2's main story is less developed than ME. The key difference between the two is that ME2's focus is not on the journey into the Omega 4 Relay, but on the journey up to it, especially on the character development of your squadmates.

 

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

 

I don't even know where this comes from. The only stand out character from the first game is Wrex. I liked Liara (aside from the fact she wants to jump your bones) and Garrus, but the rest of the cast isn't anything to write home about. This changes significantly for ME2. Mordin Solus is the most interesting and easily the most well developed character to ever appear in a Bioware game. Garrus and Tali both seemed to mature during their time spent away from you. Grunt is a humurous look at the basic Krogan desires. He lacks the refinement of Wrex, but I found this to make him more appealing. Thane provides us with our first look into the Drell psyche and is a nice aversion of the typical cold blooded assassin. I didn't find Samara or Morinth particularly interesting as individuals. I don't think Morinth's 'succubus' nature is particularly good fit for a scifi setting. Jack was an annoying and whiny *censored*, but her backstory was interesting and forcing her to face the truth of her origin was one the of the better parts of the game. Jacob was okay (except for the prize). I didn't like Miranda, but she's a good look at genetic engineering.

 

Ultimately, your squadmates in ME2 are at the very least as interesting and well developed as your ME squad. More importantly, Joker is actually funny in ME2.

 

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

 

Okay, where the heck is this supposed customization in Mass Effect? ME2 allows you to make a more visually unique set of armor. ME2 has less weapons, but the weapons have more unique properties and ME2 has more weapon types that you can use. Sure, Mass Effect has dozens of weapons per slot, but all those weapons are just slight performance improvements over one another. ME2 gives you multiple unique heavy weapons, sniper rifles that can fire more than round per reloading, shorguns for both short and long range, SMGs for short and long range, etc.

Another customization issue I see being brought up constantly is lack of abilites in ME2. This is true for your companions, but not for the player character. Mass Effect 2 PCs can have up to 7 abilites and their are a total of 39 unique powers avialable to the PC. Mass Effect only has 24 unique abilities available to the PC. Granted some of ME2's powers are ammo powers and some are simply stat increases. However, ME2 cuts away a lot of the unnecessary fat from Mass Effect.

You no longer have to invest points to improve your accuracy or damage with weapons, but lose the special damage abilities that come with those talents. You no longer have to invest points to improve your armor, but no longer gain the shield regen abilites from those talents. However, your shields now regen in cover, thus making those abilites pointless. Decryption and Electronics have been removed, allowing the player to always attempt hacking or overriding. First aid and Medicine are gone, but would have been pointless (and didn't work well in Mass Effect to begin with) because you regen health when in cover. Charm and Intimidate have been removed as talents and are now based on your respective Paragon and Renage scores, which I consider to be an improvement.

ME2 classes now have unique and distinct powers. Engineers get Combat Drones, Vanguards get the incredible Biotic Charge, Soldiers get Adrenaline Rush, Sentinels get Tech Armor, and Infiltrators get Tactical Cloak. All these abilites provide a distinct playstyle for their respective classes, an element sorely lacking in the original game.

 

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

 

What? In my experience, ME2 has more content. Everything I've found suggests that ME2 has upwards of 20 more hours of gameplay than ME. I'm still looking for more reports as to how long both games take.

The key is that ME2's side content is more fun. There are no lifeless planets to muck around on in ME2. Instead you get right into the action in the ME2 side missions. So even if ME2 is shorter, it's more enjoyable.

 

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

This is of course very subjective. I've seen people complain that ME2 has poor level design, which is simply silly. Bioware put a lot of effort into improving the level design in ME2 and they succeeded splendidly. What I'd like to know is how Mass Effect had good gameplay. At early levels your shooting is horribly inaccurate. At higher skill levels you never even need to zoom in to hit your target. You never have to worry about running out of ammo, you can crutch on silly skills like Immunity instead of flanking your enemies and counter flanking. ME2 is an excellent TPS. Yes, I know you can't crouch. You do that you're supposed to be up against cover, right?

[SpellAndShield]

I'm posting this because I am sick and tired of people going on and on about how bad and overrated Mass Effect 2 and how much better Mass Effect is than its sequel. I'm tired of people complaining about how trivial gameplay aspects (inventory, looting enemies) apparently make or break an RPG. Mass Effect 2 is an excellent game, it may just be the best single player game ever made. It is easily the most fun I've had gaming in years. It combines the action of a TPS with the storytelling and character development of the best RPGs and tosses in some cool elements suck as the new Paragon and Renagade quicktime events. If you dislike the game because its a TPS and not a traditional TBC D&D clone that's fine. Not everyone enjoys every game, but knocking it and claiming that is less of a game because of that is asinine.

 

To those who disliked Mass Effect, I recomment that you play ME2. It removes a lot of the poor elements of the original, improves combat, and is ultimately a much more polished game. The weakest aspect of the game is the mining mini game, but you don't have to invest any time in that if you do not desire. The amount of time needed to spend mining is minimal and is by no means enough to ruin the game.

 

Note: This based on the PC version of both games.

 

Points of Contention

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

But first, the obvious!

 

The Mako

 

The majority of Mass Effect players disliked the Mako. I disliked it for three reasons. The controls for it are poor, the planets you explore with the Mako are bland, cut and paste worlds, and the Mako takes away from the overall game experience. I did not purchase Mass Effect in order to drive a vehicle around in lifeless worlds. I don't think anyone else did either. If you want to include vehicles, make them secondary. The Mako shouldn't be required for Feros, Therum, Noveria, Ilos, Virmire, and many of the side missions. The Firewalker DLC was a big improvement. I hope that ME3 either avoids vehicles or makes them a secondary element

 

Graphics

 

Obviously, the improvement of graphics from Mass Effect to ME2 wasn't huge. There was a moderate improvement, but more importantly ME2 looks better AND runs better than Mass Effect. I call that a win.

 

And now the issues!

 

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

 

The first problem with this claim is that there is no accepted definition of what makes an RPG. Is an RPG simly a D&D clone? If you use this definition than neither Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 is an RPG. If you think an RPG needs an inventory system, excessive and useless talents, lootable enemies, and XP from every kill, than Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG.

I'd like to think that the most important element of an RPG is the development of your character. The most important aspect of character development is not leveling up. The most important element is how your character impacts the story and the world around him/her. The key difference between RPGs and most non RPGs is that you have many more choices in an RPG. No one can make a logical argument that Mass Effect 2 lacks character development in that you are capable of making a myriad choices that effect the story, the world around you, your squadmates, and of course, your character.

 

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

 

This assumes that Mass Effect has a good story, which it does not. Mass Effect's story is not original. The issue is not that the story of an ancient evil reappearing is common, but that those plot elements have been done to death in Bioware games. Mass Effect's strength lies in it's presentation and universe.

Mass Effect 2 lacks an original main quest and contains an element that I extremely dislike. Now, I like the fact that the 'suicide mission' is something that Bioware hasn't done before. In fact, I can't even really think of a game with a similar premise, but I'm sure there are some. My biggest issue is not that the Reapers are revealed to be essentially giant cyborgs, but that anyone thought making that hideous Human-Reaper out human mush was a good idea. Seriously, why did it have it look like a giant terminator with human larvea for eyes?

Back on topic, yes, I agree that ME2's main story is less developed than ME. The key difference between the two is that ME2's focus is not on the journey into the Omega 4 Relay, but on the journey up to it, especially on the character development of your squadmates.

 

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

 

I don't even know where this comes from. The only stand out character from the first game is Wrex. I liked Liara (aside from the fact she wants to jump your bones) and Garrus, but the rest of the cast isn't anything to write home about. This changes significantly for ME2. Mordin Solus is the most interesting and easily the most well developed character to ever appear in a Bioware game. Garrus and Tali both seemed to mature during their time spent away from you. Grunt is a humurous look at the basic Krogan desires. He lacks the refinement of Wrex, but I found this to make him more appealing. Thane provides us with our first look into the Drell psyche and is a nice aversion of the typical cold blooded assassin. I didn't find Samara or Morinth particularly interesting as individuals. I don't think Morinth's 'succubus' nature is particularly good fit for a scifi setting. Jack was an annoying and whiny *censored*, but her backstory was interesting and forcing her to face the truth of her origin was one the of the better parts of the game. Jacob was okay (except for the prize). I didn't like Miranda, but she's a good look at genetic engineering.

 

Ultimately, your squadmates in ME2 are at the very least as interesting and well developed as your ME squad. More importantly, Joker is actually funny in ME2.

 

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

 

Okay, where the heck is this supposed customization in Mass Effect? ME2 allows you to make a more visually unique set of armor. ME2 has less weapons, but the weapons have more unique properties and ME2 has more weapon types that you can use. Sure, Mass Effect has dozens of weapons per slot, but all those weapons are just slight performance improvements over one another. ME2 gives you multiple unique heavy weapons, sniper rifles that can fire more than round per reloading, shorguns for both short and long range, SMGs for short and long range, etc.

Another customization issue I see being brought up constantly is lack of abilites in ME2. This is true for your companions, but not for the player character. Mass Effect 2 PCs can have up to 7 abilites and their are a total of 39 unique powers avialable to the PC. Mass Effect only has 24 unique abilities available to the PC. Granted some of ME2's powers are ammo powers and some are simply stat increases. However, ME2 cuts away a lot of the unnecessary fat from Mass Effect.

You no longer have to invest points to improve your accuracy or damage with weapons, but lose the special damage abilities that come with those talents. You no longer have to invest points to improve your armor, but no longer gain the shield regen abilites from those talents. However, your shields now regen in cover, thus making those abilites pointless. Decryption and Electronics have been removed, allowing the player to always attempt hacking or overriding. First aid and Medicine are gone, but would have been pointless (and didn't work well in Mass Effect to begin with) because you regen health when in cover. Charm and Intimidate have been removed as talents and are now based on your respective Paragon and Renage scores, which I consider to be an improvement.

ME2 classes now have unique and distinct powers. Engineers get Combat Drones, Vanguards get the incredible Biotic Charge, Soldiers get Adrenaline Rush, Sentinels get Tech Armor, and Infiltrators get Tactical Cloak. All these abilites provide a distinct playstyle for their respective classes, an element sorely lacking in the original game.

 

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

 

What? In my experience, ME2 has more content. Everything I've found suggests that ME2 has upwards of 20 more hours of gameplay than ME. I'm still looking for more reports as to how long both games take.

The key is that ME2's side content is more fun. There are no lifeless planets to muck around on in ME2. Instead you get right into the action in the ME2 side missions. So even if ME2 is shorter, it's more enjoyable.

 

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

This is of course very subjective. I've seen people complain that ME2 has poor level design, which is simply silly. Bioware put a lot of effort into improving the level design in ME2 and they succeeded splendidly. What I'd like to know is how Mass Effect had good gameplay. At early levels your shooting is horribly inaccurate. At higher skill levels you never even need to zoom in to hit your target. You never have to worry about running out of ammo, you can crutch on silly skills like Immunity instead of flanking your enemies and counter flanking. ME2 is an excellent TPS. Yes, I know you can't crouch. You do that you're supposed to be up against cover, right?

 

ME2=way better than ME.

[Deleted2197662User]

I agree entirely with everything you have said. You sir, are awesome.

[phobert]

I've found the majority of ME1 elitists complain about the lack of vendor trash (i.e. 29 different variants of the same armor when in ME1 you really shouldn't use anything other than Spectre gear) and the lack of planet exploring (tumbling the Mako for a few minutes to a few sites). I can't think of a single thing ME1 did better than ME2. ME2 having a "weaker" story is acceptable due to it bridging the third game and the conclusion of the series. It would be akin to complaining about ESB with having Han Solo left in carbonite.

[brokenergy]

I agree with everything and would like to add that the ME writers are miles behind DA writer. At least they are more coherent than ME but to their credit at least they are starting to make up for it with later ME2 DLCs like Overlord and LotSB. Let's hope that translate to better Shepard than crazy Shepard (I would give an essay but I couldn't bother). Overall ME is a fun game and ME2 really patched things up in gameplay.

[Sinophile]

IMHO, comparing ME to ME2 is almost like comparing Call of Duty to Neverwinter Nights, or Diablo to Morrowind. In short, ME2 is more shooter, ME is more traditonal CRPG. Some people naturally prefer one genre over the other, and thus will prefer either an RPG with shooter elements, or a Shooter with RPG elements.

My biggest gripe is the paragon/renegade meter. I hated how I had to build up one or the other in order to complete some quests(such as Tali's or Morinth's), and that you were hindered if you played a Chaotic character. In most Bioware games, I don't like playing a 100% good or 100% evil character. My Second biggest gripe is how the game plays at higher difficulties. For example, on lower difficulties, the vorcha die with one shot to the head. On higher difficulties, they come with armor, and take twice as long to kill, thus making the game longer and therefore boring.

've found the majority of ME1 elitists complain about the lack of vendor trash (i.e. 29 different variants of the same armor when in ME1 you really shouldn't use anything other than Spectre gear) and the lack of planet exploring (tumbling the Mako for a few minutes to a few sites). I can't think of a single thing ME1 did better than ME2.

Given that both games require hand-eye coordination, they should make equipment to cover your weakpoints or playstyle. They should make an armor that gives bonus to hitpoints for slow characters, An Armor with bonus accuracy for those with bad aim, and perhaps a third armor with speed bonuses. Also, I would like to see moddable weapons. For example, a mod that increases rate of fire, or decreases it in exchange for more damage. Perhaps a heat-vision or X-ray scope.

 

It would be akin to complaining about ESB with having Han Solo left in carbonite.

First of all, was the Acronym really necessary? I had a bit of trouble figuring that one out even with the carbonite reference. Secondly, the analogy is slightly flawed. The Second Star Wars movie had the same "spirit"(for lack of a better term), and had the same balance of action, space battles, storyline, drama, and character growth. George Lucas didn't decide to forgo the story in order to add more special effects, or drastically change princess Leia from a fully-clothed but spunky princess, to a submissive sex kitten. On the other hand, Empire Strikes Back was the least popular out of the original three Star Wars movies, and had the lowest ticket sales.

Likewise, Mass Efffect was one way, Mass Effect 2 was another, Mass Effect 3 will hopefully take he best attributes of both to make a killer shooter-RPG.

[Halororor]

I'll say as I always say, Mass Effect 2 might not be the best game ever made, but it's certainly the best game I've ever played. I didn't really enjoy Mass Effect, but Mass Effect 2 fixed everything I found annoying with the first.

 

The first game bored me more often than it had me having fun.The mission structure was often poorly done, with you traversing endless parts of non-essentail terrain to get to your objective. ME2 focused more on the action and events leading up to your arrival at the objective, instead of just giving you corridor after corridor filled with enemies to kill.

 

I've heard people complain about how random events on planets are handled, and I think this is asinine rubbish. The planet exploration in ME1 was utterly boring, with you driving a vehicle that handled like it was driving on ice and driving to get to silly stuff all over a map that you've seen before, just with different textures. A pleasant example of how these planet side quests were done better in ME2 is the quest where you have to explore the wreckage of a ship hanging perilously over a cliff on one planet. You wouldn't be able to find such an interesting sidequest in ME1, because it would be difficult to incorporate if every explorable planet is a square area where you drive around between objectives. ME2 focused more on quality, rather than quantity, I struggle to see the harm in that. I finished ME1 on 60% completion, because I really couldn't be less arsed to do even more of those horrid planet exploration sidequests.

 

Armor and weapons customization? Honestly? People are complaining because an unnecessary and time-wasting part of the game was cut out? I'd rather focus on doing an exciting side-quest than checking which piece of armor shields more damage.

 

The part of the game that really made me love it is the fact that combat has been simplified and is handled better. In ME1, I never used powers, because they were too tedious and wasted too much time in using. ME2 streamlined the system, making use of powers something you can take 5 seconds to quickly do, then continue shooting as if nothing happened.

 

All in all, I really can't understand why anybody would complain about an RPG focusing on action not incorporating enough customization, as if that's what they wanted, the could merely go play Dragon Age or something. Then again, people always complain just ecause it's more fun to complain. Another thing I find hilarious is that pirates often complain most about games, even though they didn't lose a cent in playing it. Ridiculously funny, to be honest.

[Iv000]

 

 

Points of Contention

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

 

 

I know that that's your opinion but:

 

1. It is a Action RPG.

2. The ending just alone is a better part of the story than ME1's together.

3. In ME1 you meet the characters. In ME2 you learn their backstories and meet lots of new characters (and they actually have emotions in ME2).

4. Sadly the truth.

5. I played ME1 for a day or two, and ME2 for a week. But i agree that the story is a lot more simple.

6. ME2 improved the cover system, the abilities, and overall everything. How can you say that it has bad gameplay? The only bad thing is that the weapons don't overheat.

 

I remind you these are my opinions. Other people have different tastes...

[Halororor]

I actually preferred the universal ammo approach. I felt it was a lot better system than ME1 had, especially seeing as I had to kill Saren with a pistol because somehow all my other weapons overheated and wouldn't cool down.

 

Also, does the level of customization really matter that much if the game as a whole is just a giant improvisation.

 

And one more thing, had the entire ME2 been the same as ME1 and only had a different story, people would've complained about that as well.

[phobert]

Points of Contention

1) Mass Effect 2 is not an RPG

2) Mass Effect 2 has a weaker story

3) Mass Effect 2 has weaker characters

4) Mass Effect 2 has less customization

5) Mass Effect 2 is a smaller and shorter game

6) Mass Effect 2 has bad gameplay

 

 

 

I know that that's your opinion but:

 

1. It is a Action RPG.

2. The ending just alone is a better part of the story than ME1's together.

3. In ME1 you meet the characters. In ME2 you learn their backstories and meet lots of new characters (and they actually have emotions in ME2).

4. Sadly the truth.

5. I played ME1 for a day or two, and ME2 for a week. But i agree that the story is a lot more simple.

6. ME2 improved the cover system, the abilities, and overall everything. How can you say that it has bad gameplay? The only bad thing is that the weapons don't overheat.

 

I remind you these are my opinions. Other people have different tastes...

 

I think if you read the rest of the OP you would find those weren't his opinions.