Are Mass Effect PS3 players being short-changed?

Frogster8 on 15 Oct '10 said:

I definitely will, I've played 1+2 all the way through on xbox though so I already get the story I just want this in preparation for mass effect 3, plus its always fun to have another playthrough. I think if we can trust bioware to deliver such a fantastic story as mass effect that they will be perfectly capable of giving us something of equal standard as a "catch up". Obviously it never will compare to actually playing through the game but for them to release both on the PS3 it would be a lot harder and theres a chance of them both selling really well or people not wanting either and its a bigger risk. I would have much preferred a bundle of Mass Effect 1+2 on ps3, that would be the dream, but I suppose I can deal with this.

equinox80 on 15 Oct '10 said:

I don't know anything about the ME games but surely there must have been quite a few people who, for whatever reasons, bought ME2 for the 360 without having ever played or owned the original. The back story can always be caught up on if it's that important.

Heartfyre on 15 Oct '10 said:

I've recently been playing through ME1 again - since the PS3 announcement, in fact - and with that in mind, I'm actually sort of glad that the original game isn't releasing on PS3. It's ugly, it's clunky and unwieldly, the gameplay systems are a mess and it stands at least two steps back in almost every aspect from Mass Effect 2. The only region it still holds up is in plot and lore, and in that regard, it's very important to know.

While the time investment into these characters won't be experienced by newcomer PS3 players, they also don't have to suffer through its old design decisions, shockingly out-of-date only three years after release. I think, in many regards, this debate is premature. We don't know what form this "introductory module" will take, whether it'll just be a video lecturing at you, or an interactive segment, maybe showing important moments in their entirety. If the latter, I'd say you'll make the big decisions - Wrex, Ashley or Kaidan, the Council - all leading into the beginning of Mass Effect 2. Hopefully BioWare will clear it up soon, though, since they haven't yet, I think we'll be waiting a while.

Dajmin on 15 Oct '10 said:

Well the fact that both games work as self-contained entities will mean the PS3 guys won't be missing out on much. If the ME1 prelude section is like the crash start to ME2 (but with lots of the ME1 cutscenes) then it'll set the story up nicely.

Yes, it's a major pain but I think the more people who get to play the game the better. It's a brilliant story and a fantastically-created universe. I wonder if they'll add all of the planet info and lore entries to the PS3 release, because while it doesn't fit directly into ME2 it would be a shame to lose it all. Most of it is worth a read, too.

And hey, the movies of the PS3 version look amazing and they might even sort out the texture pop-in

Grapple on 15 Oct '10 said:

Even if a game is a sequel it should be strong enough to stand on its own, I played Oblivion without playing any of the previous versions and it didn't hurt. As an Xboxer who didn't like ME1 and ignored ME2 I'm not sure how it will go on PS3

buffig on 15 Oct '10 said:

I think this is selling the game short. The writers have done a brilliant job of making the game an excellent experience regardless of having prior knowledge. I know several people who hadnt played the first yet played the second and they all enjoyed it massively. They didnt feel like they had missed out.

kilatomato on 15 Oct '10 said:

Yes PS3 users are being shotchanged, but not by that much. Theyre missing ME1s story outside of the "in a nutshell", and to put it bluntly, ME1s story is *unquestionably* superior to ME2s, in both its overall accomplish and even the basics like how it flows.

Its simply fact, and anyone who disagrees is wrong. The basic clues are there to be seen.

Outside of that little bit of drama, its not like anything else is worth mentioning. Bioware are short changing themselves as well, since likening the ME trilogy to *TRUE* trilogies such as LOTR or Star Wars is a disservice to them. ME games are "stand alone". Bioware proved with ME2 that they are more than happy to neuter the plot and characters to be "noob friendly". That "dramatic opening" this article talks about? Nothing more than a transparent "reset", if still one dramatically well executed (and horrifically wasted to boot - it doesnt feature much outside a few references near the beginning, and is just blatant wasted potential).

ME2 was more about the gameplay anyway. Bioware cut back on the whole trilogy shebang, and just went straight for the "teh shooty fanz willz teh luv dis!"

In ME2, the "improvements" and "streamlining" (read: dumbing down) of this game into a competitor to the likes of Gears of War was clearly what Bioware focused on the most. PS3 users arent really missing a beat when Bioware cares more about the "amped up in intesity shooter combat" that this game basically revolves around than they do about the whole "epic continuation of a trilogy".

Will they do the same for ME3? I think that will be the final piece in if PS3 users have been short changed.

If the ME1 decisions really matter in an epic, story (not shooter) driven conclusion, then yes, PS3 users have lost out on more than just an epic story, but an epic continuation of a storytelling experience. If ME3 is going to follow ME2s lead, all they have lost out on is ME1s brilliant start to a trilogy filled with promise. Promise squandered in a banal pursuit of the "casual shooter crowd", where they dumbed this game down to little more than a Gears of War clone with a few cinematic and RPG "bells and whistles" to support their "visceral shooter combat".

BenThomasFoster on 15 Oct '10 said:

I've recently been playing through ME1 again - since the PS3 announcement, in fact - and with that in mind, I'm actually sort of glad that the original game isn't releasing on PS3. It's ugly, it's clunky and unwieldly, the gameplay systems are a mess and it stands at least two steps back in almost every aspect from Mass Effect 2. The only region it still holds up is in plot and lore, and in that regard, it's very important to know.

While the time investment into these characters won't be experienced by newcomer PS3 players, they also don't have to suffer through its old design decisions, shockingly out-of-date only three years after release. I think, in many regards, this debate is premature. We don't know what form this "introductory module" will take, whether it'll just be a video lecturing at you, or an interactive segment, maybe showing important moments in their entirety. If the latter, I'd say you'll make the big decisions - Wrex, Ashley or Kaidan, the Council - all leading into the beginning of Mass Effect 2. Hopefully BioWare will clear it up soon, though, since they haven't yet, I think we'll be waiting a while.

you're opinion is the clostest thing that comes to the quote "i watched the movie first, i hated the books!" you know the books are far better but because the movie (2nd game) looks better, feels better and works better. Your under the elusion that mass effect 1 is a terrible game. and well it simply isn't its overall a better game it was just a shame about the planet exploring

NugNugs79 on 15 Oct '10 said:

To be honest I will be buying a game not a film, so as long as the back story is given a once over im not too fussed.
On a side note, doesn't that Shepard character look like Jamie Carragher?

Liamario on 15 Oct '10 said:

First of all, this article is nothing but flame bait. Second of all, CVG has not played the PS3 version.

PS3 players are not getting short-changed for the simple reason that ME1 is pretty much ignored in ME2. 90% of your team are not even in the sequel and only one actually joins your squad for the second game. ME1 wasn't a great game anyways and is far surpassed by its sequel.
Any relevant information from the original game will be provided in ME2 according to the developers.

So to summarize, those PS3 players who have not played the original game, do not for a second let that influence your decision to buy the sequel.

Heartfyre on 15 Oct '10 said:

you're opinion is the clostest thing that comes to the quote "i watched the movie first, i hated the books!" you know the books are far better but because the movie (2nd game) looks better, feels better and works better. Your under the elusion that mass effect 1 is a terrible game. and well it simply isn't its overall a better game it was just a shame about the planet exploring

I won't deny that Mass Effect was an amazing game...three years ago. I got it then, and was completely and utterly enraptured by it. Even before ME2 was announced, I still considered it one of the finest sci-fi universes that have been created. Since then, after reading all the books, comics and playing that titular sequel, I love it all the more.

Yet the fractured nature of the original game, noticeable but ignorable then, has only been made more apparent in time. I'm very sure that if you plonked the original game onto the lap of someone who has no attachment to the series, they'll probably feel the same way as I do, even if they hadn't had the joy of playing through the second game. That is, if they've played any other games since 2007.

Game design has seen huge shifts since then, and BioWare's old engine just couldn't cope against the current juggernauts. You can pick your own examples of landmark games that did their presentation better, but I'll fall back on the old favourite - Uncharted 2. I still think its release was a momentous occasion that'll be affected game design for years to come, with an obvious, direct example of that being inFamous 2. Different genres, I acknowledge, but the tenets are the same. ME2 is just the culmination of a prolific three years of new thinking in game development, and the contrast between both games is just too great to release the original in the shadow of the sequel.

There's a great game hidden somewhere beneath the clumsy interface, the dodgy inventory, the imbalanced gameplay and, as you pointed out, the aimless planet exploration. It'd take a lot of work to reconstruct it into something that would be releasing alongside the sequel on PS3, even if (more-than-likely) contractual obligations didn't allow it in the first place.

And the books are always better. Just saying.

kilatomato on 15 Oct '10 said:

ME2 is just the culmination of a prolific three years of new thinking in game development, and the contrast between both games is just too great to release the original in the shadow of the sequel.

This is the kind of nonsense the reviewers spouted with no claims to back it up.

The main area of thinking that went into ME2 was "how can we dumb this game down, make it more of a shooter and make costs cheaper".

ME2 is a shadow of the former game, warts and all. Its a linear, formulaic shooter fest that doesnt deserve the hype its getting by and large because of its predecessor.

To put it plainly, if all potential PS3 buyers are looking for is a dumbed down action fest, ME2 aims to above all else cater to their desires. If they are looking for a heavily story driven, expansive and more complex experience, they are definitely being short changed with the exclusion of ME1 from the "trilogy" that they will only start at ME2. This is doubly true if, true to the devs claims, ME1 decisions are to have a big impact in ME3. Of course, they also said the RPG elements were stronger in ME2, and that simply improving the shooter aspect wouldnt imbalance the game, so they are potentially a pack of liars anyway.

budge on 15 Oct '10 said:

'It's hard to imagine new players having as deep a connection with Shepard and her cause as those who were with her on the day she became the first ever human Spectre.'

...in my eyes.

The_KFD_Case on 15 Oct '10 said:

"What is Mass Effect 2 without Mass Effect 1? Do you think that PS3 players will be able to experience the Mass Effect universe as intended without playing the first game?

More to the point, will YOU be buying Mass Effect 2 on the PS3?"

1) "ME2" is more like "ME 1.5" plot wise; it's a great gaming experience and the first time you play it the focus on action along with the help of some (mostly) high quality music, makes a person feel like he/she is part of a movie. The plot, as it were, is a poor man's version of the plot from "ME1". I think that PS3 players who haven't played "ME1" will be able to follow the storyline easily enough, but there is no way they'll have the same background understanding and emotional bonds to Shepard and various team members from "ME1" that make an appearance in "ME2", as those players whom have played both "ME1" and "ME2" (and still recall most/all of the choices they made in "ME1").

2) I plan on purchasing "ME3", but it'll be on the PC; the same platform I played "ME1" and "ME2" on.

The_KFD_Case on 15 Oct '10 said:

First of all, this article is nothing but flame bait. Second of all, CVG has not played the PS3 version.

PS3 players are not getting short-changed for the simple reason that ME1 is pretty much ignored in ME2. 90% of your team are not even in the sequel and only one actually joins your squad for the second game. ME1 wasn't a great game anyways and is far surpassed by its sequel.
Any relevant information from the original game will be provided in ME2 according to the developers.

So to summarize, those PS3 players who have not played the original game, do not for a second let that influence your decision to buy the sequel.

False. There are four members of your crew that re-join you in "ME2" from "ME1" (ok, technically there are six characters, but the delightful duo down in Engineering were never actively encountered nor mentioned in "ME1"). Two of those four are active party members (if you choose to use them).

I loved "ME2" when it came out. I still consider it a great game. I haven't gone back and played "ME1" since; perhaps if I did I might change my opinion, but as an action-RPG "ME1" strikes me as being better than "ME2" which seems more like an FPS with a cookie crumble trail of RPG elements watered down to their bare bones (which I think is a shame).

djreplay on 15 Oct '10 said:

I think only about 30% of players of ME2 imported there character from the original and less than half the people who bought it completed it so I don't think I will be too short changed.

Heartfyre on 15 Oct '10 said:

This is the kind of nonsense the reviewers spouted with no claims to back it up.

I don't think you understand what Mass Effect is trying to be. It's not a tactical shooter RPG - it's a third-person shooter RPG. Mass Effect 1 tried to be an action game, yet was so mired in the RPG mechanics that it came across like a semi-decent tactical shooter, and a clumsy action one. Mass Effect 2 fixed this by "dumb this game down", as you say. Depends on viewpoint. I do agree that they shed too much RPG from it, and that's a criticism BioWare acknowledged and pledged to fix in the next one, but this was a direction Mass Effect wanted to go in.

Want a tactical shooter RPG? Found a developing studio and make one. I hear there's a lot of devs looking for a job.

The_KFD_Case on 15 Oct '10 said:

I think only about 30% of players of ME2 imported there character from the original and less than half the people who bought it completed it so I don't think I will be too short changed.

Well, if you go the PC route, you can download save files for ME1 from the internet that can be imported to ME2. There are even saved files that focus on "Paragon" or "Renegade" play-through games.

The_KFD_Case on 15 Oct '10 said:

To be honest I will be buying a game not a film, so as long as the back story is given a once over im not too fussed.
On a side note, doesn't that Shepard character look like Jamie Carragher?

The male Cmdr. Shepard's facial looks are based upon the model Mark Vanderloo.

orobourous on 15 Oct '10 said:

It's more like starting the Star Wars original trilogy at "Empire Strikes Back" and not "Return of the Jedi" but from what I can gather the Mass Effect trilogy seems to be set up exactly like Star Wars anyway, with 1 being a standalone to try and secure funding and then 2 and 3 telling the true story.

Sure starting straight on Empire hinders you a bit but all New Hope does is introduce the characters, but this is not what's happening with Mass Effect as Bioware have stated that they will include a preclude film that gives players the whole "required" story of Mass Effect 1...personally I would like Star Wars more if New Hope was only 30 minutes long and I could jump straight into Empire.

The_KFD_Case on 15 Oct '10 said:

It's more like starting the Star Wars original trilogy at "Empire Strikes Back" and not "Return of the Jedi" but from what I can gather the Mass Effect trilogy seems to be set up exactly like Star Wars anyway, with 1 being a standalone to try and secure funding and then 2 and 3 telling the true story.

Sure starting straight on Empire hinders you a bit but all New Hope does is introduce the characters, but this is not what's happening with Mass Effect as Bioware have stated that they will include a preclude film that gives players the whole "required" story of Mass Effect 1...personally I would like Star Wars more if New Hope was only 30 minutes long and I could jump straight into Empire.

Then again, "ME1" has much better character development than "SW: New Hope". Short of the extremely mentally challenged, no one should be "lost" when playing "ME2", if they haven't played "ME1", but they will not start "ME2" with the same bond to the characters and the universe as those fans whom already played "ME1". That sort of thing takes time and exposure, neither of which PS3 players of "ME2" whom haven't played "ME1" on either the PC nor the Xbox 360 will have had. Does this prevent them from enjoying "ME2"? For some, probably not.

Ror1984 on 16 Oct '10 said:

I think that PS3 players who haven't played "ME1" will be able to follow the storyline easily enough, but there is no way they'll have the same background understanding and emotional bonds to Shepard and various team members from "ME1" that make an appearance in "ME2", as those players whom have played both "ME1" and "ME2" (and still recall most/all of the choices they made in "ME1").

Absolutely one hundred per cent this.

And I'm not sure, but it appears you forgot all about poor Dr Chakwas when mentioning carry-over characters from ME1. How could you forget ol' Chakky??

The_KFD_Case on 16 Oct '10 said:

I think that PS3 players who haven't played "ME1" will be able to follow the storyline easily enough, but there is no way they'll have the same background understanding and emotional bonds to Shepard and various team members from "ME1" that make an appearance in "ME2", as those players whom have played both "ME1" and "ME2" (and still recall most/all of the choices they made in "ME1").

Absolutely one hundred per cent this.

And I'm not sure, but it appears you forgot all about poor Dr Chakwas when mentioning carry-over characters from ME1. How could you forget ol' Chakky??

I didn't forget about her. She was one of the four (technically six) characters I thought of. Joker, Dr. Chakwas, Tali'Zorah, and Garrus (and Kenneth & Gabbie the Engineering duo).

Ror1984 on 16 Oct '10 said:

I didn't forget about her. She was one of the four (technically six) characters I thought of. Joker, Dr. Chakwas, Tali'Zorah, and Garrus (and Kenneth & Gabbie the Engineering duo).

In pointing out that you may have forgotten Chakwas, I completely forgot about Joker! How did that happen? I love Joker!

I actually felt compelled to restart ME1 last night. Second playthrough for my FemShep After that, I'm going straight into ME2 with this character and all the DLC. I have about ten games on my shelf I haven't played, and I've just started this crazy endeavour. Sorry unplayed games!

wuntuwuntu on 16 Oct '10 said:

Playing Mass Effect 2 without playing Mass Effect 1 is pointless. One of the best narrative driven games ever and people are just gonna disregard the first episode....tut tut. Its like saying The Two Towers is great... now I'm gonna go back and watch The Fellowship to catch up on the story...POINTLESS>

splitter on 16 Oct '10 said:

What a f**king waste of a minute of my life that 'article' was.

The_KFD_Case on 16 Oct '10 said:

I didn't forget about her. She was one of the four (technically six) characters I thought of. Joker, Dr. Chakwas, Tali'Zorah, and Garrus (and Kenneth & Gabbie the Engineering duo).

In pointing out that you may have forgotten Chakwas, I completely forgot about Joker! How did that happen? I love Joker!

I actually felt compelled to restart ME1 last night. Second playthrough for my FemShep After that, I'm going straight into ME2 with this character and all the DLC. I have about ten games on my shelf I haven't played, and I've just started this crazy endeavour. Sorry unplayed games!

Enjoy my good man! If you're playing it on the PC you could also download a complete 60-level Paragon or Renegade Shepard, should you ever lose your ME2 saved character and not be in the mood, nor have the time, to play through ME1 to completion again. Though I get the impression that you are playing through "ME1" because you want to, and not out of a need to have a finished "ME1" Shepard for "ME2".

Ror1984 on 16 Oct '10 said:

Enjoy my good man! If you're playing it on the PC you could also download a complete 60-level Paragon or Renegade Shepard, should you ever lose your ME2 saved character and not be in the mood, nor have the time, to play through ME1 to completion again. Though I get the impression that you are playing through "ME1" because you want to, and not out of a need to have a finished "ME1" Shepard for "ME2".

I most definitely shall! I am just playing for enjoyment, this is my fourth Mass 1 playthrough now. I did two with my male default Shep (which I consider my 'canon' storyline), then another with my customised FemShep. I have played through ME2 with my lv 60 male Shep, but haven't carried my FemShep through yet. It should be interesting, since I made vastly different choices with that character!

I'm playing on 360. I've considered getting both on pc in the past, I may yet do at some point in the future

jerryimpala on 17 Oct '10 said:

No matter how anyone wants to spin it to fit their needs, simply put, without ME1, you will NEVER be able to fully connect with shepard or the characters. Your choices as default without an import are those of a xenophobic asshole.

An introductory module will simply not suffice, when reuniting with characters like wrex, ash, Liara and Anderson, you simply wont feel the emotional reunion as you don't know who the f**k they are. I really can't imagine playing ME2 without ME1, but thats because i'm heavily engrossed into the mass effect universe.

For casual gamers who just want some trophies, yeah go and get ME2, its a fun story and has good gameplay. For those, however, who want to be immersed into the full mass effect experience and continue with YOUR shepard and YOUR decisions from ME1, i strongly suggest that the PS3 players go out and buy this for PC or Xbox, as ME2 will simply not give you anywhere close to the experience that both ME1 and 2 can give combined.

jimsondanet on 17 Oct '10 said:

I think what they would be truly short changed on is wasting the opening on noobs to the dialog wheel, poor ol john just wont have a clue where his mood stands never mind the tendency to stare blankly into space at the most awkward of times.

Sammy_bham on 17 Oct '10 said:

to start with

"With that said, the PS3 release of Mass Effect 2 is equivalent to being dropped into The Lord of the Rings during the events of 'The Two Towers', or starting the Star Wars saga with 'Return of the Jedi'. "

I think you mean The Empire strikes back. as that is the "2nd" one. (created). Get it right CVG you numpties.

now onto this little debate.

I loved mass effect 1. then played mass effect 2. and was blown away. Then played mass effect 1 again. Only to realise it isn't actually that good when compared to the 2nd one.

in terms of being short changed.... not really. NONE of the deisions from the 1st one effect anything enough for you to be bothered about in the 2nd once. The whole council part, wrex thing, etc etc. do not have major points in the 2nd game. Not enough for you to be bothered about or to effect the gameplay mechanics.

I have played the first one, but someone who hasnt isnt going to be any less off then me as the "carried over desicion" arnt that special and dont effect how you play the game. its just as amazing with or without the first game.

its a whole new story, nothing is really taken from the first one. its a whole new gameplay.

ive got both, and will eb getting it for ps3 also. (i much prefer my ps3.)

Moribundman on 18 Oct '10 said:

First of all, this article is nothing but flame bait. Second of all, CVG has not played the PS3 version.

PS3 players are not getting short-changed for the simple reason that ME1 is pretty much ignored in ME2. 90% of your team are not even in the sequel and only one actually joins your squad for the second game. ME1 wasn't a great game anyways and is far surpassed by its sequel.
Any relevant information from the original game will be provided in ME2 according to the developers.

So to summarize, those PS3 players who have not played the original game, do not for a second let that influence your decision to buy the sequel.

Agree with the flame bait side of things (CVG ran a story the other day to the (mass) effect of "will the PS3 version p**s all over the other two" and now they're moaning it won't be as good...

The fanboys aren't PS3 vs 360 (and both vs KFD ) they're ME1 vs ME2 fanboys. Ithink most people on here love or are interested in either ME1 or ME2, and the fanboyism is between those who think ME2 was dumbed down (it wasn't, they trimmed the fat and put in more GAME. You are wrong) and those who say ME1 is not worth playing due to its clunky mechanics (by today's standards it is, but its far from unplayable and the plot more than makes up for it).

ME2 *does* contain *two* recruitable team mates from the first game, but as I understand it you can meet the male one in ME2 without an imported save and Shepard treats him as though he's never met him before... The other human member of the team has a short but meaningful cameo which defines the fractured situation Shepard has found him/herself in, and whether or not another character was left alive by the end of ME1 you get a deliberately very different reception on their home planet.

I think Bioware did a good job balancing meaningful callbacks with making it an accessible gamer for new players. I do wonder though, whether they knew they'd eventually do a PS3 version all along, which was why they gave newbies quite such an easy ride... If ME2 was always going to be strictly PC and 360 only they would have been able to assume far more people would have played both games...

I think a couple of the major plot points from ME1 such as the one concerning whether a certain race is still alive, and the Perception of Shepard with various races and factions will be dealt with in the PS3 intro, because to NOT do so, would potentially mean that some HUGE, divisive, juicy plot points would be left in tatters in the third game, giving it LESS separate directions to go in.

If they do remixed versions of events from ME1 then I hope they'll make those available on the other platforms as DLC. Not everyone with a PC or 360 who liked ME2 will have played through the first one.

kilatomato on 18 Oct '10 said:

"they trimmed the fat and put in more GAME"

No they didnt. They took out one type of "GAME" and replaced it with another. A more stupid, less complex style of game where the objective is "press cover button. headshot all enemies until they are dead."

Mass Effect 2 IS dumbed down. They didnt just improve the shooter element to try and match something like Gears of War - they made it the centre of the game. Where you used to have much more room for important things like a larger focus on plot and dialogue, or other activities, in ME2 its simply the aforementioned formula of "take cover, shoot enemies". Oh of course, you can use crappy gimped biotics and tech powers if you want, but why bother when the game will eventually FORCE another weapon into your hands. Its clear where this games lay. Bioware were too greedy and lazy to look at things and take an approach that wasnt just "what would gears of war do".

Oh I dont know, maybe they could have given power based classes an optional new power instead of forcing a sniper/shotgun/assault rifle into their hands. A tragically simple choice completely ignored by Bioware in a way that demonstrates what a dumbed down shooter Mass Effect 2 is.

Just because one type of gameplay is more idiot friendly doesnt make other gameplay elements Bioware threw out any less legitimate. Just more taxing for the morons who just want twitch shooter gameplay that Bioware/EA were trying to reel in.

The_KFD_Case on 19 Oct '10 said:

Well written Kilatomato. I loved both "ME1" and "ME2", but there is no getting away from the reality that "ME2" is a poor man's shadow of the RPG side of things that "ME1" encompassed. I would love to see a better balancing act of the two genres (FPS and RPG) in "ME3", but I'm not particularly optimistic that it will happen, though I remain hopeful.