Here Neon I have played all the DLC's on my 360 and Kasumi content is just a new character that can be very useful and will give a side quest with her in 3 and you have the stuff that you did not like in 2 with the loyalty quests, now I do not remember if lair or overlord came first and LotSB is a pretty good piece with a couple of boss battles and brings back Li'ara, but they are both must have's and Arrival is a bridge between 2 and 3. So either way you should
Cool. Thanks guys.
I'm gonna go for Overlord and Shadow Broker for now. I'll consider Arrival if it's really necessary, but that isn't an add-on I need immediately anyway since it's meant to bridge ME2 and 3, so I'll wait for more opinions on that one.NeonNinja
kennythomas26's forum posts
See for me their ME2 was better then three because it still had the same feel as ME1 and improved on the gameplay a bit and ME3 was to similar to a few other game games that have come out before ME3 and I did do a user review on 3 and pointed those things out. And for me with 3 when playing the mission's gameplay felt more like Dead Space-ish and Gears or War-ish and most of the level were just more like the on-line where it was mostly wave based combat and if you have played the on-line for the game you would have notice that. So with Mass Effect 2 they seem to have done a whole lot more right with 2 and Mass Effect 3 was a bit of a step backwards and don't get me wrong it was still a great game but it fell a little short and I did not feel much for some of the character's or I should say the (NPC's) in the game I did care for a bit and then the game lost it's muster with the game play, the last few hours of the game, the on-line was fun and was not necessary. So in the end it is your opinion on what you thought was better I loved the ME 1 for the story and the rpg elements, I loved the ME 2 the most because of the trust system or loyalty mission's in order to get the main story mission's done and to get the ideal ending for ME2 in the suicide mission and ME 3 was just a disappointment for as I mentioned in this reply.
It's handily the worst game in the series. Not terrible, but a major step down from the first Mass Effect. Thankfully Mass Effect 3 remedies all of the issues with Mass Effect 2 (and the first game), but why all the praise? I don't get it and if anyone has an explanation I'd like to see it. The issues I have:
It's terrible. Levels are not only short, but they are all tiny little hallways. You literally jet forward the ENTIRE time. Good luck trying to explore anything. Sure, ME1 has levels that are larger but not necessarily as well designed, but that game was more RPG and less action anyway. ME2 goes for more action, but the level design is a joke. It's thankfully much-improved in ME3 as there are major combat areas that you have to be fully aware of while fighitng.
It's terrible. Enemies follow set scripted patterns that they repeat EACH TIME you play the game. They also respawn if you leave a room and return to it and again perform the EXACT same actions as before. They are literally cannon-fodder and present no challenge as you hunker behind cover and they pop up to shoot at you without really moving. It's sad. Thankfully, Mass Effect 3 has enemies that actually provide more of a challenge on normal than the previous two games did and they do so by utilizing their environment (going back to level design) and often flanking you if you aren't properly taking control of the battle.
Bosses are in the background
By this I mean they are not on your playing field. Also, it's terrible. In Mass Effect and Mass Effect 3 the boss is on the same ground as you. They move on the same plane as you and they pose more of a personal threat. In ME2, EVERY. SINGLE. BOSS. is a cutout in the game's background. Granted, this might be because the level design is so constricting and poor that if they added a boss character there'd be no way to properly manuever. But prepare to hunker down behind a rock and pop up and shoot the floating face of doom in the background. Don't worry, it's not going to jump over your cover and melee you in the face. It doesn't have that capability.
Mass Effect 2's existence was made relevant to me when I saw that its characters provided much of the emotional punch in Mass Effect 3. But as a stand-alone experience, Mass Effect 2's narrative is extremely poor. I know many folks say it's essentially Seven Samurai in space, and how people shouldn't criticize this game for its story as Seven Samurai is considered one of the most exciting movies ever made.... BUT, Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven and 13 Assassins are all movies that get this "suicide mission" thing right and Mass Effect 2 doesn't. You spend the majority of the game, I would say 90% of it, though that number can be argued so who cares, I'll stick with majority, recruiting team members and gaining their loyalty. You then spend maybe an hour on a so-called "Suicide Mission."
Folks, Seven Samurai spent half the movie recruiting members and the other half in the conflict. The reason why it's so exciting is not because we watch 2 hours and 45 minutes of recruitment and 15 minutes of defending villagers against the bandits. ME2's conflict is almost non-existent much of the time. Aside from a few missions where the Illusive Man tells you "hey man, we saw some Collector's here!" you're literally playing house with your team.
Jacob- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm looking for my dad."
Miranda- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm looking for my sister."
Thane- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm looking for my son."
Samara- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm looking for my daughter."
Grunt- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm hitting Krogan puberty or something, man."
Jack- "Shepard, I know we have this suicide mission, but man, I can't give it my all, cuz, you see.... I'm looking for my shirt. This strap is really cutting into my nipples, y'know? And I mean, I know we're all about taking this seriously, but WHO DAFUQ took my damn clothes and left me with nothing but a leather strap in space! It's freaking cold, man!"
In ME1 and ME3, the conflict is always around. It's front and center throughout the game. In ME2, the conflict is an afterthought, essentially making the game Short Stories in Space (sometimes with a silly twist).
The Suicide Mission
Talk about a disappointment. The Suicide Mission is longer than any other mission in the game. That doesn't mean squat. There's no emotional attachment to it. It's like a series of set pieces that lead up to one of the lamest final boss encounters in years. It's neither challenging nor exciting. Just a romp down a bunch of brown corridors. I do give it credit for utilizing the full squad, which is neat as usually Mass Effect sends out two people with you and everyone else twiddles their thumbs on the Normandy, rather than, you know, being badass like they should, but whatever.
Mass Effect 3 avoids all of these issues, and Mass Effect 2 essentially works as what can be the emotional core of ME3. But so much of it just so poorly done. I don't understand why so many people think it's so amazing. And I get that people don't like Mass Effect 3's ending, but that isn't reason enough for me when it's the far superior game (and I didn't mind the ending). And I get that people hate Mass Effect 1's Mako sections and barren planets (they are kinda dull). But again, that isn't reason enough for me on how a game that screws up the fundamentals is so highly praised by so many people.
EDIT- I forgot to mention planet-scanning and probes..... oh man I hated that.NeonNinja
I prefer WRPG's over JRPG's because I like more action oriented Role-Playing-Games and most JRPG's are all Turn Based-Role-Playing-Games, which I can play both types but I prefer WRPG's because of that and for me their is no JRPG's and WRPG's their are only Action/Role-Playing-Games and Turn based/Role-Playing-Games regardless of where they are developed and or Published, So that is my opinion on this Topic and my preference and the Action/Role-Playing-Games of the other.
Maybe 343 industries will put few new Spartans that go after to find Master Chief ( this was a joke, but who knows), and if I remember correctly at the end of Halo 3 doesn't the Arbiter say to who ever that he is going to the last known point of where MC was and start searching for Master Chief and Cortanna or something like that, but again I only beat the game once on normal and never got to finish the game on Legendary yet. So maybe I'm wrong. Still looking forward to Halo 4 and I was waiting for this game since I beat the third and never bought H3: ODST but got Reach and was a little disappointed in the SP but found the MP a little addictive.
I personally would just call a game like Dark Souls an Action-Role-Playing-Game. For most of the time with me on this whole WRPG and JRPG if it is an action oriented RPG then I guess it can fall in the WRPG and don't really have to go by where the game was developed. So my point is on this thread is for me is that is the game is an Action-RPG then it's a WRPG and if it's an Turn-Based RPG then it's a JRPG and with me in the end I don't label it like that unless I have to bring up a point or describe the two difference's and in the end Dark Souls is and Action-RPG which I will play regardless as long it's not a Turn-Based-RPG, and good topic though. One last point some people are just toostubborn and I don't think your point will get across.
I'd like to point out that I wrote a user review for Dead to Rights: Retribution at this moment and when I went to check the spelling it keep prompting me that I had to enter a score for it when I already had score for and then when I added the the score and every thing else I wen to select check spelling mistakes and it submitted my review and then when I tried to go to edit the review through DTR's: Retribution page it took me to it and then e=sent me to an error 404 crap what is going on with this web site. why is every thing all buggy and does not want to work properly and now when I select to delete the review it also takes me to a 404 error page, please fix this as as soon as you can.