Mass Effect - some questions

azarhal · January 9, 2016

Pladio said:
Just downloading the HD mod

It's 4.4GB

Compressed, it's like 11 GB once installed.

joxer · January 9, 2016

Dunno about texture mods, but you should disable motion blur first (IIRC it was on by default).

Pladio · January 10, 2016

The game is overrun with loot.

I feel like there is little point in really looking at it most of the time.

It also makes it feel like there's no real progression.
I find the game fun but it's not a masterpiece in my opinion.

azarhal · January 10, 2016

And that's why they dropped that loot design in the sequels.

But there is a progression but it's basically like Oblivion: everything is level scaled in the game including loot drops.

JDR13 · January 10, 2016

The loot system is almost worse in ME2 in that it's nonexistent. Instead of trying to improve it, they pretty much removed loot completely.

Maylander · January 11, 2016

JDR13 said:
The loot system is almost worse in ME2 in that it's nonexistent. Instead of trying to improve it, they pretty much removed loot completely.

Indeed, and they chose the same, silly solution for exploration/Mako except the few Firewalker missions. Instead of actually fixing it, they just removed it completely, which I always felt was a real shame.

Pladio · January 11, 2016

Guess, I will finish ME1 and play something else for a bit before ME2

azarhal · January 11, 2016

But ME2 is better.

Better missions design, better class abilities, better controls and better character look (the loot was changed to finding pieces of armor with various bonuses you can equip that change your armor look, I prefer it to ME1 texture reskin personally, there are too few of them though).

Moriendor · January 11, 2016

I agree that ME2 is much better overall. Night & day difference almost. I would definitely recommend playing the games back to back for the story. It is nice to import your Shepard and then play ME2 when your memory of the choices and events in ME1 is still fresh.

As I said, I half-rushed through ME1 in ~17 hours but I took my sweet time with the second game because it was way more fun to me. It also has one of the best end games I've seen in a game in a long, long time.

It's almost like they made ME1 as a proof of concept on a low budget, and then when it sold well enough, they made the real game in ME2 where every single thing is much improved over the first part (yeah except loot maybe but who cares much about loot in a story-driven RPG? Diablo = loot grinder, ME2 = story-driven RPG/characters/choices/dialogue/etc).

joxer · January 11, 2016

I disagree. ME1 is in my case much better.

Reasons?
- no Mako in ME2
- sonar grind for ress in ME2
- new "loot" system, but hell with horrible consoleoriented inventory UI in ME2
- game's ending is set in stone and out of player's control once you find IFF module

As for ending satisfaction, sorry but I don't think ME1 or ME2 ending is better than another, both are superb.

Moriendor · January 11, 2016

End game does not equal ending. The end game of ME2 is very complex with the several stages and choices and so on. I know I have a bad memory when it comes to games but I'm pretty sure that the first ME did not even come close to a similar level of complexity (warning: the linked image contains major ME2 end game spoilers).

JDR13 · January 11, 2016

I definitely enjoyed ME1 more as well.

It felt like a grand space opera to me, while ME2 was mostly about a single organization and doing companion quests. I also liked the visual style of ME1 a lot more. It seemed to have a greater variety of styles and color palettes. ME2 was just very dark most of the time.

I also found the combat in ME2 to be extremely predictable. You can almost always tell exactly when you're about to encounter hostiles.

Maylander · January 11, 2016

I enjoy them both, but I do prefer ME1 to ME2. In fact, it's ME1 > ME3 > ME2 for me, mainly because there were too many dull hallways (with crates to hide behind) in ME2. It's too repetitive. The companions and their quests were fantastic in ME2 though, probably the best implementation I've seen so far.

Carnifex · January 11, 2016

I really enjoyed them both, if I had to pick one that was superior it would be the first. The series ended with these two for me, the third (which I did try and promptly demanded a refund) and any more in the future that would require the garbage Origin platform simply don't exist for me.

Falksi · January 11, 2016

Yeah, I enjoyed ME2, but the changes they made to the combat and side quests made it a less enjoyable experience overall than ME1 for me.

I loved the overheat system, and fact your powers recharged individually in ME1. And ME2's respawning enemies made combat incredibly dull and repetitive on harder difficulty levels. Not to mention the fact Shepard would move to the right for no reason sometimes.

ME1 really captured that sense of being a space explorer with the planets too, whereas ME2's mining game was awful.

And ME3 was just an abomination.

BoboTheMighty · January 11, 2016

ME I had more of a sense of mystery, hostile unknown "out there" ( similar to Babylon V), lore, role in military/galactic politics, space exploration, even if it didn't accomplish it as well as it could have.
Whole series is oddly familiar to what was done with Dead Space.

JDR13 · January 11, 2016

BoboTheMighty said:
Whole series is oddly familiar to what was done with Dead Space.

That's an interesting comparison. I'm a huge fan of Dead Space. In fact, it's one of my favorite game series outside of the RPG genre.

Dead Space 1&2 are utterly fantastic. DS3 was a major disappointment though and has one of the worst WTF endings I've ever had the displeasure of experiencing.

I'm not sure I see too much of a similarity with Mass Effect though. Dead Space stayed fairly consistent in terms of game mechanics, inventory, etc, throughout the series, while ME went through significant changes from game to game.

I also think ME was more consistent in terms of overall quality. Even though I have an order of preference like everyone else, I wouldn't say there was a huge difference between any of the ME games. The difference between DS 1&2 and DS3 though is much more significant to me. I usually tell people to just skip DS3 entirely and pretend it doesn't exist.

Falksi · January 12, 2016

I see the Dead Space angle. Essentially an utter quality, nay classic, start; a slightly dumbed down, faster paced good second game; and a frickin travesty abomination of a 3rd game.

JDR13 · January 12, 2016

Falksi said:
I see the Dead Space angle. Essentially an utter quality, nay classic, start; a slightly dumbed down, faster paced good second game; and a frickin travesty abomination of a 3rd game.

Sort of, but I view the first two games as equals in this case. DS2 did have a faster pace at times, but it retained the tension and atmosphere that made them so special. DS3 was missing much of that.

BoboTheMighty · January 12, 2016

Hmm…It's been a while since I played them, but I remember a second one a lot less intense experience…with highs and lows and more oriented on jump scares and level design a lot more "open" than before.
I ran like hell in first when up against Regenerator…I remember playing with it in DS II.
Still a good action horror, but not nerve wrecking like DS I.
Third one would have been a disaster if not for Captain Norton.

Rage+Quitter+-+Dead+Space+3+-+robert.jpg

Mass Effect - some questions

SasqWatch

The Smoker

Guardian of Nonsense

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

Guardian of Nonsense

SasqWatch

Excommunicado

The Smoker

Excommunicado

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

Sentinel

SasqWatch

SasqWatch

Sentinel

SasqWatch

SasqWatch