What am I not seeing in Mass Effect?

  • 55 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by CrumblingAway (16 posts) -

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes, but it's kind of annoying: haven't seen the "Overheat" feature in a while in games (and I was happy), the aim is frustrating, no descent health/shield bar (unlike Borderlands) and an annoying inventory system. Am I being picky here or do more people find these things irritating?
I like to compare games in these situations, and when I compare this to Borderlands or Dead Space, they're simply better, aren't they? They don't mess around they throw you into the action immediately.
As things like annoying gameplay, which this game clearly has, annoy me very much, is there any sense in ME continuing to play, hoping that it will get better?

#2 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

Actually you're seeing it just fine, its the Hardcore Biodrones that are seeing things that are not there.

You don't have to continue, you've seen it all.

#3 Edited by cooolio (433 posts) -

@crumblingaway: The first Mass Effect is a very focused story, choices, and immersion through relationships. At least that is how i see it. When you look at Dead Space and Borderland, they set out to achieve different things.

#4 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18156 posts) -

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes

Posts like these always boggle my mind. Why would anyone want to skip cutscenes on their first playthrough of a story-driven RPG?

#5 Posted by Archangel3371 (15232 posts) -

It's more a story driven rpg then it is a third person shooter. Stick with it though as it has a fantastic atmosphere and story to it.

#6 Posted by CrimsonBrute (23118 posts) -
#7 Posted by gbrading (8057 posts) -

Mass Effect isn't really a shooter and you definitely don't play it for the shooting. It's much more an RPG adventure, and if you're not interested in that at all I agree there's little point in continuing (although that is infinitely saddening because Mass Effect is a superb game). If you're looking for a game with shooting and space, Dead Space certainly fits the bill better.

#8 Posted by LeftClick007 (76 posts) -

@gbrading said:

Mass Effect isn't really a shooter and you definitely don't play it for the shooting. It's much more an RPG adventure, and if you're not interested in that at all I agree there's little point in continuing (although that is infinitely saddening because Mass Effect is a superb game). If you're looking for a game with shooting and space, Dead Space certainly fits the bill better.

^This guy is right, your expecting the wrong things from this game. Its not going to satisfy your needs, it is what it is. Also if you are playing on a console, I dont know how well the shooting is handles on the analogs. On PC it is fine with the mouse.

And I actually like the cooldown system, but they took it away in the sequels to make it more shooter-esque. ME1 is still the best one of the 3 games, but you have to get used to its mechanics. I, much like you hated it when I first played it, returned to it months later, stuck with it and its now on my top 10 of fav games ever made. I been intending to play it again Deus Ex and Hitman keepin me busy at the moment.

#9 Edited by Legendaryscmt (12532 posts) -

You barely even scratched the game. Yes, playing it now is different than years ago. The game has several major flaws that are just amplified by today's standards. By the sounds of it, you picked the wrong game.

#10 Edited by SoNin360 (5267 posts) -

You're just talking about the first Mass Effect, right? Because Mass Effect 2 and 3 are much better, namely from a gameplay perspective. I still liked Mass Effect for its narrative and whatnot, but it's definitely not up to par with the other 2 games.

I would tell you to keep playing on or just get to the point with Mass Effect 2, (though I would have started with the first game if I could have) but you clearly have no patience with games. 45 minutes in and you already want to give up and are wanting to skip cut scenes? The story is a big part of the Mass Effect games, so it has its fair share of cut scenes and especially dialogue.

#11 Posted by CrumblingAway (16 posts) -

Good points people, good points. I'll keep playing it for the story, hope it's worth my while. As for the aim, I am not playing on console, what' bothering me is that whenever I start shooting the aim radius is starts expanding, irritating to say the least. I also get the impression that it's gonna be just like playing any of the AC games: playing it ONLY for the story, as the game itself offers little to no challenge.

#12 Edited by LoG-Sacrament (20397 posts) -

well, i agree that it does have issues in a lot of the moment-to-moment stuff that you do. the inventory is a mess and there are games that do shooting a lot better. while i suppose it may just not grab you, i think it's a game that gets better as you go.

i'll use dead space and borderlands as examples since you mentioned them. mass effect is well paced, which is something i can't say about dead space. instead of shooting things all the time, bioware mixed in resource gathering in the mako rover and plenty of down time in cities and the normandy. unlike borderlands, i enjoy the world (universe, i suppose) in mass effect for what it is instead of for just what i do in it.

do those qualities excuse what it does wrong? no, it just excels in different areas.

#13 Posted by SoNin360 (5267 posts) -

Certain classes can pretty much only use certain weapons in the first Mass Effect, otherwise you get ridiculously large reticles, which is kind of annoying. But with the weapons you can use, you'll be able to upgrade them plenty so they're easier to use and everything. The class I chose could pretty much only use pistols, and I got through the entire game using pretty much just a pistol. Of course, it functioned basically like any fully auto weapon by the time I was at the end of the game.

If you do keep playing, make sure to make use of your powers and your squad's powers. It's helpful and makes the game a little more interesting to play. Again though, Mass Effect 2 and 3 do much better with the gameplay. There aren't all floaty and weightless and actually have a good cover system.

#14 Posted by ristactionjakso (5664 posts) -

Mass effect is just a third person, cover based shooter and kida sloppy controls. They aren't bad controls mind you, just aren't polished enough. You have slight rpg elements, few powers, few classes to choose from and your decisions impact the story.

That is mass effect in a nutshell.

#15 Posted by CoquiNegro (173 posts) -

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes,

This is one of the main draws of the games. It's an rpg so its to be expected. Mass effect is not really a shooter, though the second game really fixes a lot of the problems with the first. Perhaps try to finish the first, play the second and you'll see the difference in mechanics. Even so, if you are not liking it at the moment, things aren't really going to change.

#16 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16608 posts) -

Yeah I played the original last year and didn't see very much special about it. Nothing that wasn't covered in games like KOTOR.

#17 Edited by Minishdriveby (10114 posts) -

Mass Effect 1 wasn't the greatest. It had large open worlds which was something the rest of the series was lacking, but all of the best characters, Mordin Solus and Thane Krios, come in during 2.

#18 Posted by JordanElek (17713 posts) -

What you're not seeing is Mass Effect 2.

The world-building of the first Mass Effect game is by far its greatest strength. The backstories of the different races and their relationships with each other are well thought out and fit perfectly into the sci-fi genre, and the characters in your party offer great personalized versions of them.

I couldn't stand the gameplay, though. It's janky and frustrating and not that fun. I enjoyed reading codex entries more than the combat.

But Mass Effect 2 refines the combat into something really fun, while focusing more on the individual characters in its story. Mass Effect 3 has basically the same combat, maybe a little better in my opinion, and focuses back on the intergalactic politics in some really satisfying ways.

#19 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18156 posts) -

Good points people, good points. I'll keep playing it for the story, hope it's worth my while. As for the aim, I am not playing on console, what' bothering me is that whenever I start shooting the aim radius is starts expanding, irritating to say the least.

I had the same problem and I figured out why: the first few guns you get are horrible, completely useless. Later rifles are so much better, just give it time. Until then, fire in bursts.

#20 Posted by Jacanuk (3845 posts) -

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes, but it's kind of annoying: haven't seen the "Overheat" feature in a while in games (and I was happy), the aim is frustrating, no descent health/shield bar (unlike Borderlands) and an annoying inventory system. Am I being picky here or do more people find these things irritating?

I like to compare games in these situations, and when I compare this to Borderlands or Dead Space, they're simply better, aren't they? They don't mess around they throw you into the action immediately.

As things like annoying gameplay, which this game clearly has, annoy me very much, is there any sense in ME continuing to play, hoping that it will get better?

Hmm, never heard Mass Effect being compared to Borderlands or Deadspace.

But i get the feeling that you are on of those "arnold Stallone" action movie type of games like Call of Duty, BF ect. where there is action from start to finish and you dont need to read too much or listen to boring cutscenes that really is to long.

So i would just uninstall Mass Effect and forget all about this game because it doesn't get much different and it then the game isn't for you.

#21 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ SoNin360 "But with the weapons you can use, you'll

be able to upgrade them plenty so they're easier to

use and everything." "Of course, it

functioned basically like any fully auto weapon by

the time I was at the end of the game."

And thats why I don't Buy RGPs any more. Infact lately I've begun to notice that better RPGs are overall worse games.

#22 Edited by bussinrounds (1989 posts) -

If you've played any Bioware game before, Mass Effect series will just feel like a rehash of characters, themes and plot devices. The story also felt like a bad Babylon 5 ripoff at times.

#23 Posted by CrumblingAway (16 posts) -

Hmm, never heard Mass Effect being compared to Borderlands or Deadspace.

But i get the feeling that you are on of those "arnold Stallone" action movie type of games like Call of Duty, BF ect. where there is action from start to finish and you dont need to read too much or listen to boring cutscenes that really is to long.

So i would just uninstall Mass Effect and forget all about this game because it doesn't get much different and it then the game isn't for you.

I don't play CoD, and I did enjoy the stories in games I've played, Portal especially and I can't wait for Portal 3. But here the story seems so very ordinary.

#24 Posted by Fire_Wa11 (424 posts) -

@crumblingaway said:

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes

Posts like these always boggle my mind. Why would anyone want to skip cutscenes on their first playthrough of a story-driven RPG?

Probably the most mind-boggling part is that it sounds like he is actually playing the FIRST Mass Effect, known for being a more pure and deep RPG FAMOUS for story over combat mechanics. Perhaps the original poster skipped the reviews that would have steered him instead to Borderlands 2 or Dead Space 2 or 3.

As for me? I got part of the way through my second playthru on Mass Effect 2 and I just couldn't go any farther without playing through Mass Effect 1. The game got its hooks into me that good. Mass Effect 2 is my fourth favorite video game evaaaaaaaah. As for Mass Effect 1? I liked it.

Boggle. Boggle.

#25 Edited by SoNin360 (5267 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: I'm not sure what you're saying. You don't like RPGs because there's too much progression and it's too easy by the end of it or something? I feel most RPGs and a lot of games in general have you feeling very powerful by the end o"f it. Doesn't bother me personally. I also don't know what you mean by that you've noticed "that better RPGs are overall worse games" Are you saying even the better RPGs are bad games or...? Hehe, sorry, your post just left me a bit confused.

#26 Posted by Treflis (11416 posts) -

If you don't enjoy playing the game then why try to force yourself to play it?

#27 Posted by wiouds (5014 posts) -

@SoNin360: It is better just to skip his/her comments about RPG.

#28 Posted by turtlethetaffer (16608 posts) -

@wiouds: A lesson I've slowly been learning.

#29 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ SoNin360

Its disengenuous for a game to reward you by making you more powerfull. As for my second point, I noticed that the games people consider to be better RPGs are terrible games. Such as Dark Souls and the 1st Mass Effect game, the more role playing elements they have the worse they are overall as video games, naturally all RPGs before 2005 are exempt from this theory.

Its kind hard to explain, give me an example of a damn good recent RPG and I'l see if I can explain my theory.

#30 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69529 posts) -

Gameplay wise, it's perhaps the weakest one. But it's still an awesome game and relies way more on story than Dead Space and Borderlands put together. If you don't like the story, maybe you shouldn't be playing. Personally i adore the Mass Effect trilogy, favorite games last gen

#31 Edited by wiouds (5014 posts) -

I would say the first one is the best balance between RPG and shooter.

#32 Posted by Diablo-B (4021 posts) -

ME1 is all about the story. The actually game mechanics has many flaws that by todays standards dont hold up but for its time it was unique from every other game.

ME 2 & 3 have much better game mechanics and shooting. Which is why I always get confused when people say ME1 was the best or that ME3 was the worst. ME3 has the best game mechanics of the series. But nostalgia makes everything in the past seem perfect.

#33 Posted by CrumblingAway (16 posts) -

@Fire_Wa11 (can't tag you for some reason), I didn't read any reviews, at all. I just heard it's an awesome game and the end of the 3rd is supposedly god awful, so it made me curious.

#34 Edited by BranKetra (47740 posts) -

The best part of Mass Effect 1 is its story. If that does not interest you, its flaws will probably be more obvious than if you were willing to be lenient with them for the enjoyment of that one aspect. AAlso, I am surprised you do not like the menu system of the PC version because that was said to be an improvement from the console menus.

#35 Posted by FieldOfView (17 posts) -

@crumblingaway said:

I've just started playing Mass Effect, didn't really get too far, literally 45 minutes tops thanks to the unskippable cutscenes

Posts like these always boggle my mind. Why would anyone want to skip cutscenes on their first playthrough of a story-driven RPG?

This. Seriously.

#36 Posted by wiouds (5014 posts) -

@Diablo-B said:

ME1 is all about the story. The actually game mechanics has many flaws that by todays standards dont hold up but for its time it was unique from every other game.

ME 2 & 3 have much better game mechanics and shooting. Which is why I always get confused when people say ME1 was the best or that ME3 was the worst. ME3 has the best game mechanics of the series. But nostalgia makes everything in the past seem perfect.

The problem I have with ME2 and 3 is that they took out too much of my control of how the character is made. In ME2 the only two things that matter was what class and extra weapon you choose. The rest was so easy to get so all character of one class were almost the same. Instead of strengthening the RPG withing ME2 and 3 they weaken it and hurt the games a bit. I have a ton of shooters and I did not want the ME games to be that way.

#37 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ wiouds

The problem is Mass Effect one's structure was so damn impractical, yes it had more RPG Elements but they were executed poorly, basicly it was complicated for the sake of being complicated because Role Playing Gamers are into that sort of thing for some reason. Something I notice about people who like dense RPGs like Mass Effect 1 Fallout and The Elder's Scroll is they're still treating these games like they're make believe and powered by the imagination. And thats just sad, :(

ME2 and 3 are better RPGs because you don't have to fill in as many blanks with your imagination as much as you did with the 1st game.

#38 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

Bioshock is a better RPG than the 1st Mass Effect.

#39 Posted by good_sk8er7 (4320 posts) -

Why compare it to Borderlands?

Anyways if you don't like it you don't like it.

Most people like the second a lot more because the gameplay is tighter and better.

#40 Edited by firefox59 (4335 posts) -

Gameplay wise, it's perhaps the weakest one. But it's still an awesome game and relies way more on story than Dead Space and Borderlands put together. If you don't like the story, maybe you shouldn't be playing. Personally i adore the Mass Effect trilogy, favorite games last gen

I don't think weak is the right word. It's definitely way different than the later two games. You have to play the first ME more strategically sound cause of the longer cooldown on abilities. You also have to use the environment in a different way. Much more of an emphasis on using your squadmates effectively as well. I liked it cause of the tactics. In the 2nd and 3rd game you could basically kill everyone yourself using either powers or weapons. The first game kinda requires you to use everything.

#41 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ firefox59

No it doesn't. Infact I believe you actually have it backwards. The 1st games was seriously unbalance, I didn't even have to take cover 90% of the time, I could beat Mass Effet one with sheer brute force alone.

#42 Posted by LoG-Sacrament (20397 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

Gameplay wise, it's perhaps the weakest one. But it's still an awesome game and relies way more on story than Dead Space and Borderlands put together. If you don't like the story, maybe you shouldn't be playing. Personally i adore the Mass Effect trilogy, favorite games last gen

I don't think weak is the right word. It's definitely way different than the later two games. You have to play the first ME more strategically sound cause of the longer cooldown on abilities. You also have to use the environment in a different way. Much more of an emphasis on using your squadmates effectively as well. I liked it cause of the tactics. In the 2nd and 3rd game you could basically kill everyone yourself using either powers or weapons. The first game kinda requires you to use everything.

i end up using my squadmates' powers more in ME2 than ME1. in ME1, every power has it's own cooldown so i can basically do combos with shepard's powers alone. in ME2, the cooldown for a power blocks off use of all powers for that character so i have to see what my squadmates can do in that downtime.

#43 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ firefox59

No it doesn't. Infact I believe you actually have it backwards. The 1st games was seriously unbalance, I didn't even have to take cover 90% of the time, I could beat Mass Effet one with sheer brute force alone.

#44 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69529 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

Gameplay wise, it's perhaps the weakest one. But it's still an awesome game and relies way more on story than Dead Space and Borderlands put together. If you don't like the story, maybe you shouldn't be playing. Personally i adore the Mass Effect trilogy, favorite games last gen

I don't think weak is the right word. It's definitely way different than the later two games. You have to play the first ME more strategically sound cause of the longer cooldown on abilities. You also have to use the environment in a different way. Much more of an emphasis on using your squadmates effectively as well. I liked it cause of the tactics. In the 2nd and 3rd game you could basically kill everyone yourself using either powers or weapons. The first game kinda requires you to use everything.

it's more RPG-ish compared to the other ones. More strategic, while the two sequels rely on more on skill alone

#45 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ The_Last_Ride

Precisely ! :D

#46 Edited by HipHopBeats (2861 posts) -

I'm struggling to get through Mass Effect 1 due the dull, wonky combat system and the cluttered rpg mechanics despite the good story. Mass Effect 2 and 3 on the other hand are much more enjoyable. Mass Effect 3 got kind of silly with the weight limit of the guns affecting your power cooldown. Mass Effect 2 is the best in series imo.

#47 Edited by playmynutz (5962 posts) -

I would rate mass effect 1 as one of my favorite games of last gen, one of the very few games I watched every cutscene, attempted all achievements, replayed the whole game at least 4 times.

Mass Effect 2 is a perfect balance between mass effect 1 & 3. Mass effect 3 is fun and fast pace but just didn't pull me in like mass effect 1 (maybe because I'm older and games in general aren't magical)

#48 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

@ HipHopBeats

Sadly it seems some people ("hardcore gamers") prefer the inferior 1st game. Gamers be crazy. :(

#49 Posted by firefox59 (4335 posts) -

@firefox59 said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

Gameplay wise, it's perhaps the weakest one. But it's still an awesome game and relies way more on story than Dead Space and Borderlands put together. If you don't like the story, maybe you shouldn't be playing. Personally i adore the Mass Effect trilogy, favorite games last gen

I don't think weak is the right word. It's definitely way different than the later two games. You have to play the first ME more strategically sound cause of the longer cooldown on abilities. You also have to use the environment in a different way. Much more of an emphasis on using your squadmates effectively as well. I liked it cause of the tactics. In the 2nd and 3rd game you could basically kill everyone yourself using either powers or weapons. The first game kinda requires you to use everything.

i end up using my squadmates' powers more in ME2 than ME1. in ME1, every power has it's own cooldown so i can basically do combos with shepard's powers alone. in ME2, the cooldown for a power blocks off use of all powers for that character so i have to see what my squadmates can do in that downtime.

The cooldown's are so quick though that it is basically insignificant. You can use one of the strongest combos, say singularity and throw, every 5 or 6 seconds. Whereas in the first game you could do that once a minute.

#50 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (9634 posts) -

It would be nice if they could irredicate pause menus entirel, I think its cheating.