Mass Effect has always been closer to a mediocre video game that got gassed up because of its fiction n characters, even though the story usually wasn't that good. In fact in the case of 2 and 3 the endings are dumb as fuck. Really the Human Reaper? A Terminator Reaper? The Termareaper?


Fuck outta here.

Planet Scanning?

Metroid barely has a story that's as intrusive as the one in a cinematic game, and Devil May Cry is tongue n cheek. And yeah in the same context I'd say the story for Metal Gear and Final Fantasy are habitually shit if any thought is put into processing them for their story. The difference, all of those except Final Fantasy play well or have interesting gameplay ideas. Mass Effect while having good characters, plays like a mediocre third person shooter. And for a game that takes itself as seriously as Mass Effect, it's conclusions should then be a lot better than "well video games are ridiculous".

I've put in about four hours so far, making it to the first planet.  I'm really enjoying it...it's Mass Effect.  The animation isn't jarring at all, especially like described.  I can tell that faces are slightly rounder and eyes are larger, probably the developers way of being able to expressing emotion.  

The missions are fun, but I can't help being reminded of Gears of War: Judgement.  Mechanically, it's just as solid as it's predecessors, but it doesn't seem as special as the trilogy.  I guess that's bound to happen though considering you are starting from scratch.

Archangel3371 said:

Played some multiplayer last night. The gameplay feels "jittery". The maps feel smallish and the general layout of them just doesn't seem all that great. You can't really find any good places to bunker up because it seems enemies can come from so many directions that it feels a bit too frantic and haphazard. Don't like the cover mechanics because it feels too tricky trying to get and maintain solid cover protection. The camera feels a bit too close to the character.

That sounds almost exactly like ME3's multiplayer.

Archangel3371 said:

Somewhat. I can't remember exactly how ME3 mp was but while this obviously looks better I think in some aspects it's not quite as good. The maps felt better in ME3 and I don't think the camera was quite as close. The gunplay might be a little better in this one. I still need to play more of it and get some mods and stuff for weapons and that to really tell more.

The team that made the multiplayer in ME3 is the team that developed this game.

Oh so the guys who only did the multi-player up to now were responsible for the entire game this time? Damn...Bioware placed a lot of faith in these guys. I still kind of wonder if this was just a game they were FORCED to make, with Mass Effect being by far their biggest IP, and they really just wanted to be done with it after the trilogy so they just said fuck it, EA wants a new game...hey you guys do it, good luck!

I really like the game but as Travo said, it definitely doesn't have the magic that the old ones had. It also for me has gotten to the point of repetition...I'll call it "Open World- itis". Go here, do this, repeat. I just hope they don't water down the franchise too much because it's too legendary for it to get dragged through the mud. Hell, Mass Effect started before Bioware was part of EA...Microsoft funded the first game as a major 360 exclusive. Crazy how times changed.

In terms of the reviews I still say some of them seem out on a witch hunt. I wonder if it's more politics than anything, as much of the shit I've heard about Bioware lately sounds like people would use it as a reason to lowball their games. I guess they've been employing some pretty shady folks lately.

edgecrusher said:

I personally don't take any games seriously so that's not a problem for me.

I'm curious though, what games do you consider to be quality 3rd-person shooters?

Resident Evil 4

Vanquish

The First 2 Max Payne games*

The Last of Us

Binary Domain

Gears of War's multiplayer+the campaigns for the first 2 games

Uncharted 2+4

Off the top of my head. I'm sure I'm missing something else. Functionally on top of making the act of shooting a gun enjoyable (sans UC2), none of them make the movement feel as stiff and as wooden as Mass Effect does. Resident Evil 4's movement limitations if anything are the whole point of why its mechanics work, and how the game builds its variety of scenarios around things. Mass Effect also makes the issue all cover shooters have, worse. Because if it's reliance on its story, it's a game that benefits from immersion. And cover shooters tend to have very gamey looking levels, where it's clear as day they are built for combat arenas. Naughty Dog to their credit try to make an effort of coming up with spaces where that stuff is natural (a train for instance), but the cover mechanic with regen health dictates a certain level of gamey spaces.


In Mass Effect those spaces are formulaic to a fault. You usually walk into an empty space that completely telegraphs that you are about to get some shooting in, so any "oh my god, it's an ambush" never feels like an ambush, because the levels are a giant neon sign that say "mother fucker we about to fight". Additionally in the case of 2, majority of the main missions, even loyalty ones can be described as - 4 floors/rooms of those cover shooting arenas that barely differentiate, and a 5th floor/room where there is a boss character that is either big machine thing that is spongy, or just one of the regular enemies but with a big ass shield, and they have have support. And the end, that's the mission.

The game lacks the enemy variation that makes Gears of War 2 work, or the variety of set ups that make Resident Evil 4 engaging, or the moment to moment tension that can make The Last of Us satisfying.

Personally the thing that made the series enjoyable, was everything but the gameplay. The music, the voice actors, the characters, and all that jazz.


*Max Payne 3 also has an exceptional shooting engine, but Rockstar hates fun and constantly interrupts their game flow with these super contrived cutscenes because Rockstar is also obssessed with the idea of being "cinematic".

In terms of being a shooter, Andromeda is the best one out of the bunch. It's not a better game overall because it doesn't do all those other good things you mentioned as well, but the actual combat and mechanics are greatly improved over ME2 and 3. Some people have actually compared it to Vanquish.....I won't because I haven't even played Vanquish.

Well I just finished this one.

Whle it's definitely not as great as the Trilogy, it's still a solid game well worth playing. 8.2/10

This is the Dragon Age 2 of the ME series. The story isn't as good, the characters while fine just aren't as interesting as before. Most of the missions can't hold up to the epic stuff from the trilogy. And you spend half the game doing useless side quests that become super repetitive. That said, the combat is fun, the worlds are beautiful to explore, and the game still has that feeling that only Mass Effect has.

SupremeAC said:

How many NPC's did you speak?

Huh?

edgecrusher said:

Well I just finished this one.

Whle it's definitely not as great as the Trilogy, it's still a solid game well worth playing. 8.2/10

This is the Dragon Age 2 of the ME series. The story isn't as good, the characters while fine just aren't as interesting as before. Most of the missions can't hold up to the epic stuff from the trilogy. And you spend half the game doing useless side quests that become super repetitive. That said, the combat is fun, the worlds are beautiful to explore, and the game still has that feeling that only Mass Effect has.

Agree after fifteen hours of play.  As good as ME is, every time I play it, I long for another KOTOR.