I Don't get all the love for Mass Effect 2

[Cheesetogo]

Personally, I loved the combat in ME2.

The depth of the characters and your ability to speak with them definitely does not touch the level that KoToR did. That being said, I still thought there was some decent character development and some interesting personalites.

 

[micrometers]

I completely disagree. Action games (like ME2) are twitch based shooters, they rely on your physical skill with the controls to win. RPGs are the opposite; you role play a character whose strength is determined by their in-game stats/abilities, not how fast you can press buttons.

To the OP, I completely agree with you. ME1 was an amazing game. The story, setting, characters and game play were all much better IMHO.

In ME2 there is plenty of role-playing going on. I roleplay as commander shepard. I wonder if I can trust cerebus. I decide if I want to side with Miranda or Jack. I am in the conversation and choose how I want to romance a certain character. I step into his/her shoes when he/she goes into combat. That is role-playing.

What is missing are the excel spreadsheet aspects of old RPG games. And old RPG's are excel spreadsheets because technology for real time gameplay didn't exist back then, so they just made do with dice rolls and turn-based gameplay.

 

[micrometers]

Absolutely there is nothing wrong with RPG-Lite. The only problem I have is when they sell games like ME2 in the same bucket as games like DA:O, NWN(1-2), BG - Series, etc.... It's miss-leading. ME2 is a significant departure from those others and are lacking in areas that make those games loved by their player base. Not to say it isn't a good game, but it isn't the same.

And if you don't want customization, that is perfectly valid as well. There are those of us who DO like that level of customization and are disapointed by it's lack in cases like this. Which is why I think that if RPG games have come to mean "Customization" at least in part, game developers should find a different designation for games that they create that don't have that focus.

ME2 is closer to the RPG spirit than Halo. in ME2 you manipulate the cutscenes by choosing conversation paths. You can customize the power and specialization of your character, while in Halo you cannot.

the only thing missing from ME2 are excel spreadsheet aspects, like adding 1 or 2 strength every level.

 

[sigurros81]

I bought into the hype and reviews and got the game first day. The game was pretty damn disappointing that I ended up taking almost half a year to beat the game, just because I don't like leaving games unfinished.

Between the first and second, the first was very good, very cool story with a very climatic and engaging second half.

Here are my issues with the ME2:

-It tries to be "RPG Lite" married with Gears of War 3rd person shooting, yet the game ended up being mediocre on all fronts. Boring AI and and repetitive shooting. The RPG elements was just a joke, I just ran around with my Dragon Age armor set the entire game.

-Stupid ass metagame of trying to mine for minerals. Can it be anymore boring try to scan planets for minerals to upgrade your ships.

-Also, for a game set in space and interstellar travel, the amount of content felt a bit small and constricted. Major cities felt compacted and the missions are very brief.

-The story was much weaker than the first game, but to be fair maybe the first one when it came out was quite a refreshing take on the space epics, something new at the time.

Overall, if you ask me a memorable scene within ME2, I sure as hell can't recall any of it, everything felt very repetitive for 30 hours.

 

[Red Storm]

In ME2 there is plenty of role-playing going on. I roleplay as commander shepard. I wonder if I can trust cerebus. I decide if I want to side with Miranda or Jack. I am in the conversation and choose how I want to romance a certain character. I step into his/her shoes when he/she goes into combat. That is role-playing.

What is missing are the excel spreadsheet aspects of old RPG games. And old RPG's are excel spreadsheets because technology for real time gameplay didn't exist back then, so they just made do with dice rolls and turn-based gameplay.

Nope, by that logic every game ever made is an RPG.

 

[micrometers]

Nope, by that logic every game ever made is an RPG.

any game where you control a character and which has a storyline that you can change, yes.

 

[micrometers]

how was the story weaker? The first's story was almost an RPG cliche: you go around saving the world from a world-ending enemy.

I really enjoyed the opening sequence in ME2.

 

[micrometers]

I actually think that this game would be amazing as a competitive deathmatch game.

 

[thespyder]

ME2 is closer to the RPG spirit than Halo. in ME2 you manipulate the cutscenes by choosing conversation paths. You can customize the power and specialization of your character, while in Halo you cannot.

the only thing missing from ME2 are excel spreadsheet aspects, like adding 1 or 2 strength every level.

And here we have exactly the problem.

Halo isn't an RPG of any kind or description. Its a FPS. God of War has more RPG elements than Halo. Which doesn't make either game bad (or ME2 for that matter) just not an RPG.

And no, ME2 is missing a heck of a lot more than merely the "Excel Spreadsheet aspects" to qualify as an RPG.

Again, there is nothing wrong with liking ME2. But when stacked up against the Best of the RPG games it is lacking IN RPG ELEMENTS.

 

[micrometers]

And here we have exactly the problem.

Halo isn't an RPG of any kind or description. Its a FPS. God of War has more RPG elements than Halo. Which doesn't make either game bad (or ME2 for that matter) just not an RPG.

And no, ME2 is missing a heck of a lot more than merely the "Excel Spreadsheet aspects" to qualify as an RPG.

Again, there is nothing wrong with liking ME2. But when stacked up against the Best of the RPG games it is lacking IN RPG ELEMENTS.

my point is that video games in general where you control a character with a past present and future are in effect role playing games because you 'ROLE PLAY' as the character. In Halo that means you pretend to be master chief.

 

[Red Storm]

my point is that video games in general where you control a character with a past present and future are in effect role playing games because you 'ROLE PLAY' as the character. In Halo that means you pretend to be master chief.

But that doesn't make them an RPG, which has come to mean a specific type of game. You know this.

 

[zinfamous]

how was the story weaker? The first's story was almost an RPG cliche: you go around saving the world from a world-ending enemy.

I really enjoyed the opening sequence in ME2.

The opening sequence for ME2 was phenomenal. Too bad that doesn't singly define the game, because it falls flat after that.

The first one is superior because there is a fully-developed story. ME2 ends, just when it is about to start. You begin the game trying to figure out how to get through the gate, 80% time on character quests after that, then you get through the gate...Game Over! nothing is really accomplished. All of the story is ancillary--it is through character side quests.

Naturally, story should be driven through character, but these are unconnected individual plot lines involving characters that may be dead at the end--hence, completely meaningless to the overall ME story.

On its own, ME2 is worthless. Depending on how ME3 plays out, it can be quite good, but they have to be considered together. As such, ME1 is far superior in terms of content and a complete story.

I thoroughly enjoyed playing through ME2 up until the end, then what I realized what was the end, I wrote it off as trite. It's a fun playthrough, sure, but it shouldn't be confused with an RPG or anything with a complete story.

If you want to see Bioware actually do RPG, then play DAO. Or the Bioware 3rd-person, character driven action-RPG, try KotOR.

 

[micrometers]

DA:O is horrendously bad.

 

[Red Storm]

DA:O is horrendously bad.

Coming from the person who says ME2 is the epitome of RPGs.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinion though.

 

[thespyder]

DA:O is horrendously bad.

In your decidedly minority opinion.

my point is that video games in general where you control a character with a past present and future are in effect role playing games because you 'ROLE PLAY' as the character. In Halo that means you pretend to be master chief.

And also by your definition, Tomb Raider is a RPG because you play the role of Lara Croft. Or Mario Bros. because you play Mario (or Luigi). Only they aren't. There is a HUGE difference between playing the avatar of a game and playing a Role Playing game. If there weren't than EVERY SINGLE GAME EVER MADE would be considered an RPG. But they aren't.

Take a look at games like DA:O or Baldur's Gate or Neverwinger Nights. you create your protagonist. you name them. You choose what they look like and what skills and abilities they have and use. You aren't playing the role designed by the game developer. You are playing YOUR character. This is one of the primary precepts of RPG type games.

another precept is that you choose what path your character plays. You don't have one single "On the rails" path through the game, there are usually multiple paths and multiple endings. Games like Halo don't have this either.

In short, there is NO DEFINITION wherein Halo is anything at all anything like a Role Playing game. and claiming that it is or can be seen as such only proves that you don't understand what an RPG is.

Look, no one is saying that the types of games you like are not good. Or that playing non RPG games is any more or less valid than playing RPG games. merely that there are differences.

 

[KeithTalent]

The opening sequence for ME2 was phenomenal. Too bad that doesn't singly define the game, because it falls flat after that.

The first one is superior because there is a fully-developed story. ME2 ends, just when it is about to start. You begin the game trying to figure out how to get through the gate, 80% time on character quests after that, then you get through the gate...Game Over! nothing is really accomplished. All of the story is ancillary--it is through character side quests.

Naturally, story should be driven through character, but these are unconnected individual plot lines involving characters that may be dead at the end--hence, completely meaningless to the overall ME story.

On its own, ME2 is worthless. Depending on how ME3 plays out, it can be quite good, but they have to be considered together. As such, ME1 is far superior in terms of content and a complete story.

I thoroughly enjoyed playing through ME2 up until the end, then what I realized what was the end, I wrote it off as trite. It's a fun playthrough, sure, but it shouldn't be confused with an RPG or anything with a complete story.

If you want to see Bioware actually do RPG, then play DAO. Or the Bioware 3rd-person, character driven action-RPG, try KotOR.

All of this, except for the DA:O stuff as I've never played it. :thumbsup:

KT

 

[zinfamous]

DA:O is horrendously bad.

explain, since you have no dearth of reasons to love ME2.

 

[thespyder]

explain, since you have no dearth of reasons to love ME2.

On second thought, please don't. Karmypolitics has gone on at lenght in other threads about how DA2 was awesome (in their opinion) and that DA:O is excrible. Would hope to save this thread for the purpose laid down (which is ME2).

 

[terry107]

On second thought, please don't. Karmypolitics has gone on at lenght in other threads about how DA2 was awesome (in their opinion) and that DA:O is excrible. Would hope to save this thread for the purpose laid down (which is ME2).

Aye. He has made it quite clear with his other posts that he shuns traditional RPGs.

 

[Darklife]

I've been saying this repeatedly, but I'll say it again. I think ME2 is leaps and bounds beyond the stale, generic muck that ME1 turned out to be.

Those of you criticizing the removal of the original's so called RPG elements should take a good hard look at what those "elements" actually were. We got a horrid and dysfunctional inventory system, that made us do a full fucking inventory check every time you'd want to loot an enemy's corpse - something every RPG must have.

We got a superficial weapon and armor upgrade system, which was tedious to use and provided no real meaning or benefit.

Oh! We also got a plethora of mundane and cookie-cutter side quests, all of which for some reason took place in nearly identical locations.

The gameplay was equally shit; from the annoying ammo management system to those horrible, horrible MAKO driving sections.

What ME2 did was simply get rid of these things, as in their current form they simply had no purpose, being a mere token RPG presence. Instead the game embraced its action aspect, to great success. I'm not saying that they couldn't have had improved these things ans mold the sequel into a proper RPG, but those features were simply useless in their current state.

As to the story, ME1's felt simply uninspired to me, just another Bioware game where you have to save the world with your bunch of buddies, BUT IN SPACE! There were no difficult moral choices, no shades of gray, no atmosphere.

Whereas that of the sequel was much more brooding, filled with difficult choices and answers. I have to say that I found myself much more immersed in the plot and atmosphere, and it was one of the two games where I actually didn't reload the game when I made a bad call in the story, the Witcher being the other.

 

[irishScott]

The opening sequence for ME2 was phenomenal. Too bad that doesn't singly define the game, because it falls flat after that.

The first one is superior because there is a fully-developed story. ME2 ends, just when it is about to start. You begin the game trying to figure out how to get through the gate, 80% time on character quests after that, then you get through the gate...Game Over! nothing is really accomplished. All of the story is ancillary--it is through character side quests.

Naturally, story should be driven through character, but these are unconnected individual plot lines involving characters that may be dead at the end--hence, completely meaningless to the overall ME story.

On its own, ME2 is worthless. Depending on how ME3 plays out, it can be quite good, but they have to be considered together. As such, ME1 is far superior in terms of content and a complete story.

I thoroughly enjoyed playing through ME2 up until the end, then what I realized what was the end, I wrote it off as trite. It's a fun playthrough, sure, but it shouldn't be confused with an RPG or anything with a complete story.

If you want to see Bioware actually do RPG, then play DAO. Or the Bioware 3rd-person, character driven action-RPG, try KotOR.

Of course it's not a complete story. It's the middle entry in an overarching trilogy. It's job was to set the stage for the epic climax and develop the characters, which it did very well. ME1 had a complete story because it was first out of the gate and Bioware wasn't sure they were going to have enough success for a sequel.

As you said, whether it did its job or not largely depends on ME3, but this is Bioware we're talking about. I have faith.

 

[zinfamous]

Of course it's not a complete story. It's the middle entry in an overarching trilogy. It's job was to set the stage for the epic climax and develop the characters, which it did very well. ME1 had a complete story because it was first out of the gate and Bioware wasn't sure they were going to have enough success for a sequel.

As you said, whether it did its job or not largely depends on ME3, but this is Bioware we're talking about. I have faith.

yeah, but that's not the argument. See, it can't possibly have a better story than the first, then, because as you said, it is incomplete.

it simply does not stand on its own.

 

[Keeper]

I couldnt stop playing one.... tore into ME2 and was like Meh.........
I wasnt sure if it was game suckage or I was awash in ME overload.
Reading this, seems game suckage LOL

 

[micrometers]

Who cares about the plot? I'd say you'd have to be pretty damn gullible to care about a "save the universe" type plot which is so prevalent to be cliche. More interesting were parts like the fate of the migrant fleet and individual character stories. I'd recommend to most to just skip ME1 and go straight to ME2. The story will be more satisfying and the gameplay definitely so.

 

[KeithTalent]

Who cares about the plot? I'd say you'd have to be pretty damn gullible to care about a "save the universe" type plot which is so prevalent to be cliche. More interesting were parts like the fate of the migrant fleet and individual character stories. I'd recommend to most to just skip ME1 and go straight to ME2. The story will be more satisfying and the gameplay definitely so.

Hell no. The first one sucked me in and I cared about what I was doing with my character and the decisions I was making, the second felt like a re-hash of the first, but with less gravitas.

KT