Mass Effect 3 • Gaming • General Gaming • Eurogamer.net

INSOMANiAC 9 Dec 2010 23:40:05 4,732 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago

Has multiplayer??

http://www.vg247.com/2010/11/20/sony-russia-biowares-vga-reveal-to-be-mass-effect-3/

Deleted user 9 December 2010 23:42:32

If handled correctly, I don't really see an issue with this. Could be good fun

Also ME2 is a dumb down version of ME1

INSOMANiAC 9 Dec 2010 23:43:17 4,732 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago

this one does

http://www.vg247.com/2010/12/09/rumor-mass-effect-3-to-be-shown-at-vgas-has-multiplayer/

heyyo 9 Dec 2010 23:44:01 14,356 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 16 years ago

Only time will tell.

Deleted user 9 December 2010 23:47:02

I'll be playing ME multiplayer on ps3

Who'd of thunk it.

INSOMANiAC 9 Dec 2010 23:48:05 4,732 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago

Well Mass Effect 2 was a dumbed down, poorer version of ME1 so why not throw in some tacked on multiplayer, take all the rpg elements out and fuck the series once and for all.

INSOMANiAC 9 Dec 2010 23:52:04 4,732 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago

no, it wasn't

Murby 10 Dec 2010 01:05:00 235 posts
Seen 9 years ago
Registered 13 years ago

There's only one way to settle this.....

trip919 10 Dec 2010 01:09:42 2,348 posts
Seen 4 months ago
Registered 12 years ago

'Rumours suggested may be a Mass Effect multiplayer spin-off.'

That sounds totally shit to me.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 01:31:13 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Murby wrote:
There's only one way to settle this.....

A hug?

/hugs

Deleted user 10 December 2010 01:36:30

ecureuil wrote:

INSOMANiAC wrote:
Well Mass Effect 2 was a dumbed down, poorer version of ME1

No it wasn't. It was Mass Effect 1 with all the RPG bits removed.

there you gooo.

dsmx 10 Dec 2010 01:38:50 8,640 posts
Seen 4 minutes ago
Registered 16 years ago

Mass Effect 1 felt like an RPG whereas Mass Effect 2 felt like a 3rd person shooter. At least that's the impression I had as I went through both games.

The first game had far more depth to the combat and far more choice in everything, the second game streamlined everything to make it more accessible and more fun for more people.

At least that was my impression anyway.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 01:50:55 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

What "depth" to the combat did the first game have? I barely even needed to take cover.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 01:52:10 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Also, no Mako bits means the second game is better.

Although I did like some of the Firewalker missions.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 02:15:33 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Yeah, it took way, way less time. You only really had to scan the Rich planets to get enough minerals for everything.

And no more driving around to find anomalies! \o/

Scimarad 10 Dec 2010 05:40:03 9,964 posts
Seen 16 hours ago
Registered 18 years ago

lavalant wrote:

ecureuil wrote:

INSOMANiAC wrote:
Well Mass Effect 2 was a dumbed down, poorer version of ME1

No it wasn't. It was Mass Effect 1 with all the all the crap inventory management and mountains of identical loot removed.

there you gooo.

Re-fixed!

Why do people think faffing around in an inventory = roleplaying. Surely the roleplaying bits were the conversations and they were better in the sequel. The only crap decision was removing the vehicle exploration sections and replacing them with a crappy scanner rather than actually doing it right this time.

Articulate-Troll 10 Dec 2010 05:55:37 3,098 posts
Seen 11 months ago
Registered 14 years ago

Inventory management can add a lot of depth to an RPG, if the items offer genuine tactical alternatives. In the case of Mass Effect however, you were really just upgrading weapons so it made sense to streamline the process.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 06:21:15 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Yes, it was ridiculous to have a dozen Katana V and 10 Katana IV shotguns or whatever, carting them around to sell for money you can't even spend on anything. So much clutter.

sirtacos 10 Dec 2010 07:21:41 8,279 posts
Seen 4 months ago
Registered 14 years ago

ecureuil wrote:

INSOMANiAC wrote:
Well Mass Effect 2 was a dumbed down, poorer version of ME1

No it wasn't. It was Mass Effect 1 with all the shit bits removed.

This.

Original statement does not compute. How the fuck could anyone think thus is a mystery. The original inventory faffing about was absolute bollocks and I'm glad they did away with it... even though I admittedly would have preferred a more in-depth non-crap inventory system that actually gave you more choice with regards to equipment and loot. But I prefer not having any choice at all than having ME1's tedious micromanagement of endlessly similar poop, like Genji said.

lostlain 10 Dec 2010 07:48:05 48 posts
Seen 1 month ago
Registered 11 years ago

I'm just more surprised that people think Mass Effect 1 was an RPG!? It was always more of an adventure game with shooty bits, except the adventuring wasn't RPG enough to be an RPG and the shooter bits weren't tight enough to be a good shooter. So for the second they had to take it in some direction. I really enjoyed both, but the second felt like a better game (even if the plot got slightly silly)
After playing both Dragons age and the Mass Effect games i'd dare say that Bioware are a lot better at "dumbed down" action games with rpg-light elements. Than a full blown RPG. For all it's hype talking about how DA would be returning to Baldurs Gate style game, anyone who remembers Baldurs Gate will agree that Dragons Age doesn't come close.

OnlyMe 10 Dec 2010 08:08:36 3,135 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 18 years ago

I've only played 5 minutes of Baldur's Gate 2, and I still had more fun than I had during the several hours of playtime in Dragon Age I had to suffer through before I decided it was asboring as dry bread. But it being a more RPG than Mass Effect 2 had nothing to do with it.

Mass Effect 2 felt like a level-based action game, and missed a lot of the same feel of ME1. I'd say the overall story and the structure of the game was a lot better than ME2. Gameplay wise, the move to a more action based game was an improvement over the gameplay in ME1, but that was mostly because it was tighter.

I'd compare the difference (in gameplay) between ME1 and ME2 is kinda like the difference between TES: Morrowind and TES: Oblivion. A lot of stuff was dumbed down/simplified, but the controls and gameplay was tighter. A lot of stuff in Morrowind was much better than in Oblivion, but the gameplay was not one of them. Just like ME1 vs ME2.

Deleted user 10 December 2010 08:47:02

ecureuil wrote:

INSOMANiAC wrote:
Well Mass Effect 2 was a dumbed down, poorer version of ME1

No it wasn't. It was Mass Effect 1 with all the shit bits removed.

A billion times this.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 09:08:55 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Dumbed down? Seriously? All they did was unclutter the weaponary and upgrades so you're not carting loads of crap around, and making the skills bars shorter, so you see more result for each skill increase.

I wouldn't even call it "simplified". More like "streamlined". ME1 was needlessly complex. Not "deep" - just confusing and annoying.

I liked it, by the way. Wouldn't have finished it otherwise. But imo ME2 is better in just about every way that's important.

INSOMANiAC 10 Dec 2010 09:53:04 4,732 posts
Seen 13 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago

It saddens me to see so many wrong people all in one place.

Genji 10 Dec 2010 09:57:18 19,682 posts
Seen 10 years ago
Registered 17 years ago

Which ones are wrong?

Me?

;_;