Have to say, that was my immediate thought as well. Be glad I have a conversation once you’ve played the first game. Until then, what do we have to discuss?
Given that it had some of the best characters and some of the most entertaining quests in any RPG it is difficult to understand how anyone could not find ME2 fun. I guess if you were looking for a shooter then it might seem bland but that is not what the game is about. That is like approaching Stellaris thinking that it is a tactical ship combat simulator or Stardew Valley as a serious business simulation. It is a story and NPC driven RPG with moderately interesting combat mechanics but thankfully did not cross over into being simply another boring shooter.
It’s also a virtual straight line from beginning to end. And it has basically no bearing on the overall three game story.
Human reaperrrrrrrrrr brain melts
To address your first sentence - yes and this is what allows it to be a story and NPC driven RPG. Bioware quite often kept their RPGs linear to tell a story. Games like KOTOR and DAO are very similar in structure and are classics of the genre.
To address your second sentence - this is not the fault of the 2nd game but rather the fault of the story of the 3rd game. Besides, when every choice in the game comes down to red, blue or green not much of anything has any ultimate bearing on the story.
Bullshit. I had a galaxy to explore in the first game, and they yanked it away from me in the second game. If I wanted to play a critical path game, I’d play a JRPG. And you’re going to yet again fault the last half hour or so of the third game to throw some shade on it? You’ve had six years since the game released and that’s all you got?
Bloody hell man, put a warning on that. It’s likely to cause people PTSD ;)
No, no, no. Meant I haven’t played Andromeda. Of course I’ve played ME1 in order to call it overrated. Did I miss a comma, perhaps? English is not my 3rd language. 😁
And I didn’t mind the story in ME, certainly liked some of the world building, but the game was clunky for me. I played it on the Xbox 360 so maybe it played better on the PC. Due to its less clunky nature, combat in 2 was quicker, smoother. I’m not saying combat was GOOD in ME2 but it felt better. And I don’t remember riding elevators for 2 minutes or bouncing around very hard to control vehicles. But by the end I got bored and didn’t finish the game until a year later to play 3 (kind of what I did with the first game).
You seem to be easily triggered.
That galaxy that you explored in ME1 was a huge time sink with almost no payoff. If you cut out the exploration in ME1 you - quite literally - played the game in 1/2 the time and missed out on nothing critical at all. I am glad you enjoyed that aspect of the game but it was ultimately quite meaningless which is why it was removed from 2 and 3.
While you may prefer your RPGs to be open worlds many of Bioware’s best efforts are far more linear. As previously mentioned, KOTOR, DA:O, ME2 and ME3 all more or less follow that linear formula and are all considered great games never mind slightly lesser ones like Jade Empire. Bioware did a great job of creating the world of BG2 but their forte was always characters and quests, not worlds and exploration.
PS. I will ALWAYS throw shade on the last half hour of 3 because it remains so incredibly stupid. But if you are going to criticize 2 for not playing much of a part (outside Cerberus) in 3 then that was the choice of the writers in 3. I fail to see how that is the fault of 2 given the reception of the game.
I don’t think you understand what the words “critical path” mean. The fact that you can cut out half the game and take out nothing “critical” is a good thing. You have all the space in the galaxy to explore and seek out interesting things. You know, like playing a space game. If you want to play a game that’s only critical path, I.e. only things that advances the plot, then you must not enjoy Bethesda’s games, or the Witcher games, or most other Bioware games.
You’re just regurgitating tired old criticisms from the same old critics we’ve been hearing from for years. That does in fact trigger something in me - to cease taking you seriously.
But the shooting is, at a casual estimate, at least 50% of the time spent with the game, and more so in some sections and most of the DLC content. And it’s incredibly dull.
I mean, I’ve played ME2 twice, so I’m not saying that it is, overall, a bad experience. I pointed out the great characters and entertaining missions (though I think “most entertaining in any RPG” is overselling by a significant margin even if we omit the weakness of the combat that’s such an integral part of most of them) in the very post you quoted. But I think nothing at all of value would be lost if it had been, say, a visual novel. Or at the very least had had a ‘story’ difficulty mode like 3 and Andromeda.
You also mention not playing Vanguard. Which, having tried most non soldier classes, is by far the most enjoyable one.
In the first game, Adept was by far the most enjoyable one. Sadly, the awful mechanics changes in 2 effectively ruined that class.
I see a fellow Vanguard connoisseur. Good day to you old chap/girl/gender neutral person.
However for the true Vanguard you don’t charge at individuals one at a time, you charge at a group, and respec your charge to deal multiple impact (can’t remember what it is called). Then you pick anyone in a group and either shotgun or melee it. When your shield is down again but charge isn’t ready yet, you do a Nova and stagger the group and buy yourself a few seconds to melee or shotgun (when you do Nova you are invincible). When the charge is ready, repeat. You will kill everything.
Vanguard totally works in singleplayer as a death dealing machine/glass cannon. In multiplayer however you are playing dice with death because of lag. You better play as host if you want to play vanguard. ME:A Asari Vanguard is the ultimate death dealing vanguard because she has very high melee damage and can teleport. Though normally I would give her the best sniper rifle I have instead of shotgun, for mini bosses. Shame she was so hard to get in loot box you have to spend real money to get her. Human vanguard (you get it for free) is an adequate alternative to Asari Vanguard most of the time.
I don’t remember which ME game was which. I didn’t like scanning planets or driving the rover around. I don’t think either was interesting at all.
I think my favorite may be the one where Mordin sings. I don’t recall how combat changed from one to the other. The main draw for me in these games has always been the story or the characters. ME had some great characters.
I really enjoyed Andromeda for like 40 hours or so. Then I sort of drifted away and started playing other stuff. I like the exploration, and I like how it’s essentially a different sequel to ME1 (my favourite) than ME2 was. But Andromeda is also the only Mass Effect game that I haven’t actually finished. By contrast, I’ve played the other ones each at least twice…
Ashley was a god damn racist. She deserved to die. =)
While you are just regurgitating the same old rants we have been hearing for years. It does not trigger anything in me though and this is a gaming discussion so I do not take much of it seriously anyway. If you are so easily triggered about a game discussion then I feel deep concern for your ulcer.
The reason I love ME2 so much and dislike ME:A is the story and characters. Rails or no rails, I play a Bioware RPG for the story with some interesting scenery and world building thrown in for flavor.
People talk about the Bioware formula because it was a formula. Intro > split to 3 quest hubs done in any order > End. Good story telling and interesting locations were my reason for enjoying those games. Driving the Mako in ME:1 was a mini-game.
IMO:
ME:1 is fantastic because of the world building and the main quest line.
ME:2 is fantastic because of the secondary characters and the loyalty missions.
ME:3 is dead to me.
ME:A is terrible, not because of graphics, but because the story and characters are so bad that it becomes unplayable. The mistakes made in game focus are well documented at this point so there is little point in a re-hash.
Also, there is no way to compare ME:A to Bethesda or Witcher 3. There is no open world here. There are no interesting storylines found in the wilds of ME:A. I already know whats over the next hill. What is over the next hill is the worst thing in the world (another pile of black cubes with some midling loot and a few things to shoot).
That’s just nonsense, demonstrably so. There were multiple open worlds in Andromeda. And calling the story and characters so bad as to be “unplayable” is meaningless hyperbole. You don’t want to play the game, that’s your business. Let’s not fall back on trite and essentially meaningless phrases to justify your choice.