Star Wars Knights of the old republic (Original) Vs Mass Effect

Which do you guys think is the better game?

I'm gonna say Kotor.

KOTOR is a much better game. The combat system in KOTOR takes a bit of getting use to but once you do it's fine.

KOTOR's story is much better than ME's. KOTOR is full of genius moments like the murder case you get involved in and there's a number of different ways you can handle it. Mass Effect has nothing as good as this. I also hated the way Mass Effect handled it's weapon upgrading. You just ended up with a mountain of crap in your inventory that you didn't need and end up selling it all.

I had no need for credits through Mass Effect anyway. I think I finished the game with over 2 million. Mass Effects main story wasn't long enough and the uncharted worlds thing was a good idea but executed badly. It was just very, very repetitive. I didn't like only being able to control Shepard. I didn't like the way you had to sacrifice weapon training if you wanted to have tech and biotic abilities either.

I think KOTOR and Jade Empire are better than Mass Effect. Mass Effect is a good game but Bioware are capable of so much more. They released the best game of 2003, did Mass Effect win any awards?

KotOR is much better game. It was longer, the story was much better, the worlds you'd visit were a lot more interesting and varied, the powers were more satisfying to use, and character interaction was deeper. Also, some of the missions were leaps and bounds ahead of anything in Mass Effect. The murder investigation and the subsequent trial is just one example of KotOR's superior mission design. The only thing in which ME beats KotOR hands down is the graphics. They were quite drab in KotOR, but there was so much amazing content, that it was easy to overlook the game's technical limitations. I truly think KotOR is one of the best RPGs ever made.

Mass Effect is also great, but it's a frustrating game overall. It simply should have been much better. It shows so much potential, but the few bad design decisions almost completely cripple it. The mindless repetition of the uncharted planets, too many pointless side-quests, not enough main-mission levels, as well as pacing problems really undermine some of the things it does fantastically well. It's a shame, but I still hold great hopes for ME 2....

For me it was KOTOR. I enjoyed Mass Effect a lot, I mean a lot, but KOTOR was a game I played over and over again and never seemed to lose interest in it.

I'm a big Star Wars fan and that probably had something to do with it. KOTOR was basically the video game equivalent of a Star Wars movie trilogy.

Which do you guys think is the better game?

I'm gonna say Kotor.

Phantsy16

KOTOR is a far better game, there's actually better character development and you're not treated to a "oh hi commander sheppard" circle jerk.

Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.GSU28

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.EvilTaru

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

Pretty much. KOTOR wins by a California landslide -- even WITH the Carth glitch. I still shouldn't even talk about Mass Effect, because I'm still super bitter about it.

Both of these games were games that sucked me in and wouldn't let go. I thought KOTOR would be my record for fastest completion of an RPG until I played Mass Effect... :roll: so the two are pretty close for me.

Mass Effect has the advantage of a speaking protagonist. I don't normally mind playing a silent character, but in KOTOR I'll admit it bothered me because my character was saying so much, but at the same time saying nothing at all. With Mario or Link they're usually only expected to make monosyllabic grunts and squeaks or to nod here and there, but with KOTOR the main character is remarkably verbose for a silent protagonist. It broke the spell for me a little.

KOTOR has its own advantages though, that I think beat Mass Effect in the end. In KOTOR I replayed because I genuinely wanted to see what would happen if I became a sith, or romanced Bastila, or killed Juhani. Mass Effect I replayed because I wanted the renegade achievement or the sniper specialist achievement; and I don't think that just wanting more achievements is the same quality of replay as the games you play because you can't resist them.

KOTOR just had so much more to do, the main planet missions were longer and more engaging and there were more of them. If Mass Effect had had six main planets that were as high quality as Noveria or Vermire it might have won for me, but I guess I'll have to say KOTOR by a nose.

I chosen Kotor because of the story and the gameplay and of course the setting. I also think the good/evil side of the game was more prominemt then it is in Mass Effect, you really felt evil in Kotor as aspose to Good cop Bad Cop in Mass Effect. The combat was also really fun and you felt like a jedi, you just feel like another soldier in Mass Effect.

[QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.Shame-usBlackley

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

Pretty much. KOTOR wins by a California landslide -- even WITH the Carth glitch. I still shouldn't even talk about Mass Effect, because I'm still super bitter about it.

Very much so. Toss in that Mass Effect's interaction with the characters and the galaxy itself was actually a step down from KOTOR. I could do something that would have all the medpacks triple their price since I'd be creating a big shortage, or I could solve things differently. In Mass Effect? Kill the colonists or not, it makes no difference either way. And as mentioned, tossing in probability into a lackluster shooter - I can literally hit a target just as often with the assault rifle if I intentionally miss him but shoot in his general direction as I can if I actually aimed at him - and the game was enjoyable, but lost potential. Oh, and need I mention the mako controls? That should seal the deal.

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.EvilTaru

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

Oh, it's KOTOR. No question.

In fact, the more I reflect on Mass Effect, the more I realize how much of a train-wreck it was. Terrible gameplay, a convoluted story, recycled environments, uninteresting side-quests, and myopic AI just killed the experience for me.

Mass Effect by absolute leaps and bounds. fantastic game all around, while i could barely play kotorOneWingedAngeI

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"]Mass Effect by absolute leaps and bounds. fantastic game all around, while i could barely play kotorAzelKosMos

i think for me it is that most WRPGs leave me unmotivated and drifting, and mass effect was one of few WRPGs that did not do that to me.

[QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.OneWingedAngeI

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

Then why do they have you aim guns, pull the trigger, and use a cover system? I understand they didn't want it to be a standard third-person shooter... but that's how they designed the freaking interface! They really should have stuck with some turn-based D&D mechanics like they're good at, but it seems MS threw up their hands and gave in to the fact that the 360 fanbase is shooter-happy and that'll be more popular. To many people, if it looks like a poor shooter, than it is a poor shooter.

And if aiming doesn't matter, why do they have us, you know, aim? Or use tricks to make your aim more accurate if more accurate aim doesn't matter? Why try to fool people?

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"][QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.argianas

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

Then why do they have you aim guns, pull the trigger, and use a cover system? I understand they didn't want it to be a standard third-person shooter... but that's how they designed the freaking interface! They really should have stuck with some turn-based D&D mechanics like they're good at, but it seems MS threw up their hands and gave in to the fact that the 360 fanbase is shooter-happy and that'll be more popular. To many people, if it looks like a poor shooter, than it is a poor shooter.

And if aiming doesn't matter, why do they have us, you know, aim? Or use tricks to make your aim more accurate if more accurate aim doesn't matter? Why try to fool people?

aiming is so back row to everything else that goes on when you literally pause the action to do it. if you are playing the game aiming like a normal shooter you are not playing it correctly. the idea is to use the biotics to disorient and manipulate your foes and then blast them, all while stopping the action to coordinate the battle to play out how you choose. aiming does not matter. its like saying that a normal rpg's combat is based on navigating the menu's; its an afterthought, a side effect of what is really going on. i guess a lot more people missed out on how the combat is supposed to play out than i thought.

the cover system was just kind of there, you really didnt need to use it - i never did. i hid behind things but actually using the cover system was a waste.

and MS had nothing to do with the design of the game.

[QUOTE="argianas"][QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"][QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.OneWingedAngeI

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

Then why do they have you aim guns, pull the trigger, and use a cover system? I understand they didn't want it to be a standard third-person shooter... but that's how they designed the freaking interface! They really should have stuck with some turn-based D&D mechanics like they're good at, but it seems MS threw up their hands and gave in to the fact that the 360 fanbase is shooter-happy and that'll be more popular. To many people, if it looks like a poor shooter, than it is a poor shooter.

And if aiming doesn't matter, why do they have us, you know, aim? Or use tricks to make your aim more accurate if more accurate aim doesn't matter? Why try to fool people?

aiming is so back row to everything else that goes on when you literally pause the action to do it. if you are playing the game aiming like a normal shooter you are not playing it correctly. the idea is to use the biotics to disorient and manipulate your foes and then blast them, all while stopping the action to coordinate the battle to play out how you choose. aiming does not matter. its like saying that a normal rpg's combat is based on navigating the menu's; its an afterthought, a side effect of what is really going on. i guess a lot more people missed out on how the combat is supposed to play out than i thought.

the cover system was just kind of there, you really didnt need to use it - i never did. i hid behind things but actually using the cover system was a waste.

and MS had nothing to do with the design of the game.

The problem was that the game could very easily be played as a mediocore 3rd person shooter. The first (and only) time I played through it I accidentally created a weapon-only character (I thought it was like KOTOR where in character generation you choose a class that's more focused on abilities, magic, or combat...turns out that in ME you choose a class that's only abilities, magic, or combat). I ended up playing the game like a 3rd person shooter and had no problem doing so, save for the fact that it was increadibly boring. The teammate biotics/techs didn't help much either since by the time I started using them Shepard was able to mow through mobs with no problem so there wasn't really ever a need or a reason to use them. When I went back and started playing through a second time on a higher difficulty I had the same gameplay experience and I just stopped playing at that point. One of these days I'll probably go back and create a biotic character just to give the game another chance and play through as a good guy instead of renegade.

Which was another problem. The good/evil system in the game was a joke compared to KOTOR. In KOTOR whether or not you were good or evil, and how good or evil you were had a large influence on the gameplay and progression of the story. In ME all it really did was...well...nothing really. Your squadmates may have liked you a little bit less and your superiors may have complained if you were a renegade but that was about it. There were some good moments, like at the very end of the game when you finally get to make a massive decision regarding which direction the game goes in (too bad the game has ended by then). But in KOTOR you came across those kinds of decisions at every corner.

I'd have to say that my biggest problem with ME was how linear the game was. There were few good side missions (most of them wanted you to go to some barren uncharted world, kill some pirates, and then return back to the NPC that gave you the mission), the uncharted worlds were hardly worth exploring unless you were going for achievements, and even the worlds that were crucial to the main story were mostly devoid of side quests and micellaneous things to do. Overall the only thing that ME had over KOTOR was the graphics. Yeah, the writing of the script was excellent, but I wouldn't say that it was leaps and bounds ahead of KOTOR's especially when you consider that the writing in ME was really only good between characters and when it concerned the main plot.

The problem was that the game could very easily be played as a mediocore 3rd person shooter. The first (and only) time I played through it I accidentally created a weapon-only character (I thought it was like KOTOR where in character generation you choose a class that's more focused on abilities, magic, or combat...turns out that in ME you choose a class that's only abilities, magic, or combat). I ended up playing the game like a 3rd person shooter and had no problem doing so, save for the fact that it was increadibly boring. The teammate biotics/techs didn't help much either since by the time I started using them Shepard was able to mow through mobs with no problem so there wasn't really ever a need or a reason to use them. When I went back and started playing through a second time on a higher difficulty I had the same gameplay experience and I just stopped playing at that point. One of these days I'll probably go back and create a biotic character just to give the game another chance and play through as a good guy instead of renegade.

Which was another problem. The good/evil system in the game was a joke compared to KOTOR. In KOTOR whether or not you were good or evil, and how good or evil you were had a large influence on the gameplay and progression of the story. In ME all it really did was...well...nothing really. Your squadmates may have liked you a little bit less and your superiors may have complained if you were a renegade but that was about it. There were some good moments, like at the very end of the game when you finally get to make a massive decision regarding which direction the game goes in (too bad the game has ended by then). But in KOTOR you came across those kinds of decisions at every corner.

I'd have to say that my biggest problem with ME was how linear the game was. There were few good side missions (most of them wanted you to go to some barren uncharted world, kill some pirates, and then return back to the NPC that gave you the mission), the uncharted worlds were hardly worth exploring unless you were going for achievements, and even the worlds that were crucial to the main story were mostly devoid of side quests and micellaneous things to do. Overall the only thing that ME had over KOTOR was the graphics. Yeah, the writing of the script was excellent, but I wouldn't say that it was leaps and bounds ahead of KOTOR's especially when you consider that the writing in ME was really only good between characters and when it concerned the main plot.

gameguy6700

see for me playing it like a shooter only lasted the first few minutes. i played it on whatever the hardest mode was they let me, i forget the name (although they should not have locked the hardest mode, that crap pisses me off to no end). i soon started playing with the biotics and it is a much better experience. i will give you they didn't really do a good job of showing you thats how you should be playing though. i could see how if you played it as a shooter how the game would be very lackluster. going back after the fact isnt going to really change your mind.

i actually liked the somewhat linear nature of the game, as games like KOTOR and oblivion tend to lose me with their lack of cohesion and motivation to progress. ME did have total crap side planets and i do understand why many people like KOTOR more, but not me.

[QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.OneWingedAngeI

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

The combat which is the majority of the gameplay, consists of shooting enemies, yes, it's a SHOOTER. For a shooter, aiming does matter, in Mass Effect, it's based on keeping your ridiculously large reticle on the enemy and whether you hit the enemy or not comes down to the probability of a dice-roll, and trying to reduce the enemy's generous hit points, there's nothing sweet or symphonic about it, shooters are about accuracy and precision, that's the best part, REWARDING THE PLAYER'S SKILL, here you're not really rewarding that but how powerful you've managed to level up your gun. Instead of timing your reload, you're basically stuck with a system where you WAIT for your weapon to cool down.

[QUOTE="argianas"][QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"][QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.OneWingedAngeI

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

Then why do they have you aim guns, pull the trigger, and use a cover system? I understand they didn't want it to be a standard third-person shooter... but that's how they designed the freaking interface! They really should have stuck with some turn-based D&D mechanics like they're good at, but it seems MS threw up their hands and gave in to the fact that the 360 fanbase is shooter-happy and that'll be more popular. To many people, if it looks like a poor shooter, than it is a poor shooter.

And if aiming doesn't matter, why do they have us, you know, aim? Or use tricks to make your aim more accurate if more accurate aim doesn't matter? Why try to fool people?

aiming is so back row to everything else that goes on when you literally pause the action to do it. if you are playing the game aiming like a normal shooter you are not playing it correctly. the idea is to use the biotics to disorient and manipulate your foes and then blast them, all while stopping the action to coordinate the battle to play out how you choose. aiming does not matter. its like saying that a normal rpg's combat is based on navigating the menu's; its an afterthought, a side effect of what is really going on. i guess a lot more people missed out on how the combat is supposed to play out than i thought.

the cover system was just kind of there, you really didnt need to use it - i never did. i hid behind things but actually using the cover system was a waste.

and MS had nothing to do with the design of the game.

And that is why the game has a pure soldier class where it's essentially all shooting-based, because they don't want people to play as a soldier, yet they have it as one of the classes the player can choose.

Enemy AI was week, ally AI was just as bad, maybe worse. The classes aren't particularly balanced either, sure you can use biotics, but then you don't get to have heavy armor and your weapon handling would be crap which you ultimately would rely on even if you use biotics to knock people down or tech to bring down someone's shield, with KOTOR, the skills are just better balanced and managed.

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"][QUOTE="EvilTaru"]

[QUOTE="GSU28"]Mass Effect has better gameplay, acting, and dialogue. But, I think that KOTOR has a better story. The twist in that game was one of the best I have ever seen.EvilTaru

Does it? The shooting mechanics is mediocre at best, it's basically a shooter with a limited cover system, dumb enemy and ally AI, damage based on probability and NOT aiming accuracy, repetitive subquests with recycled levels over and over again.

so you call it a shooter (which it isnt) and then talk about how aiming doesn't matter? biggest problem with ME is people who try to play it like a shooter. they happen to use guns as their weapons but it really is nothing like a shooter. aiming, as you said, does not matter (and thankfully so). played correctly, the combat in mass effect is a sweet symphony of destruction, as you orchestrate the battle in a bullet time like fashion. KOTOR combat didn't do it for me. like i said, i couldnt even finish the game it was so uninteresting.

The combat which is the majority of the gameplay, consists of shooting enemies, yes, it's a SHOOTER. For a shooter, aiming does matter, in Mass Effect, it's based on keeping your ridiculously large reticle on the enemy and whether you hit the enemy or not comes down to the probability of a dice-roll, and trying to reduce the enemy's generous hit points, there's nothing sweet or symphonic about it, shooters are about accuracy and precision, that's the best part, REWARDING THE PLAYER'S SKILL, here you're not really rewarding that but how powerful you've managed to level up your gun. Instead of timing your reload, you're basically stuck with a system where you WAIT for your weapon to cool down.

yeah you totally dont understand the game. try again. the game is not what would be classified as a shooter. even the devs said as much. they happen to use guns ok. is final fantasy a hack and slash because you use swords? no. the shooting is not the focal point. you said it yourself there is no rewarding the player for aiming, because well DUH its not the base of it. you don't get it, its okay.

yeah it has that class but the focus is still the special abilities. the game does not care about your aiming, its focus is on the set-up of combat. its clear why you don't enjoy it.

i thought the KOTOR AI was terrible. not that ME's was revolutionary but since we are comparing games, neither of them excelled. the armor vs biotics is a choice. i played a vanguard which allows for decent armor, weapons, and biotics. maybe you picked the wrong class.

And that is why the game has a pure soldier class where it's essentially all shooting-based, because they don't want people to play as a soldier, yet they have it as one of the classes the player can choose.

Enemy AI was week, ally AI was just as bad, maybe worse. The classes aren't particularly balanced either, sure you can use biotics, but then you don't get to have heavy armor and your weapon handling would be crap which you ultimately would rely on even if you use biotics to knock people down or tech to bring down someone's shield, with KOTOR, the skills are just better balanced and managed.

EvilTaru

Almost all RPGs have a pure fighter class... like, oh I don't know, the Final Fantasy fighter.

Having a fighter cIass that uses guns doesn't make the game a shooter. It makes it an RPG with a fighter cIass that uses guns. When RPG developers stick with the traditional mechanics that require no player skill, they're criticized for not innovating. When they make an action RPG that requires more than simple button mashing, they're criticized for making a lackluster shooter. I agree, Mass Effect wasn't perfect. The combat mechanic also wasn't perfect. But let's judge it for what it is, an action RPG.

Oh, it's KOTOR. No question.

In fact, the more I reflect on Mass Effect, the more I realize how much of a train-wreck it was. Terrible gameplay, a convoluted story, recycled environments, uninteresting side-quests, and myopic AI just killed the experience for me.

Dutch_Mix

I think you nailed my feelings on the game. I enjoyed it and right after I beat it I was on a bit of a post game high. But then when I started to think about it, the disapointment set in. It seems Bioware is slowing shedding the RPG elements, and slowing turning these things into (sloppy) action games with branching paths.

aiming is so back row to everything else that goes on when you literally pause the action to do it. if you are playing the game aiming like a normal shooter you are not playing it correctly. the idea is to use the biotics to disorient and manipulate your foes and then blast them, all while stopping the action to coordinate the battle to play out how you choose. aiming does not matter. its like saying that a normal rpg's combat is based on navigating the menu's; its an afterthought, a side effect of what is really going on. i guess a lot more people missed out on how the combat is supposed to play out than i thought.

the cover system was just kind of there, you really didnt need to use it - i never did. i hid behind things but actually using the cover system was a waste.

and MS had nothing to do with the design of the game.

OneWingedAngeI

thats one of the funniest posts i've read. devs put some features in game and you say you should not use them roflmao. you cant hide a failure by not talking, its still there even you dont talk about it.

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"]

aiming is so back row to everything else that goes on when you literally pause the action to do it. if you are playing the game aiming like a normal shooter you are not playing it correctly. the idea is to use the biotics to disorient and manipulate your foes and then blast them, all while stopping the action to coordinate the battle to play out how you choose. aiming does not matter. its like saying that a normal rpg's combat is based on navigating the menu's; its an afterthought, a side effect of what is really going on. i guess a lot more people missed out on how the combat is supposed to play out than i thought.

the cover system was just kind of there, you really didnt need to use it - i never did. i hid behind things but actually using the cover system was a waste.

and MS had nothing to do with the design of the game.

TheLegendKnight

thats one of the funniest posts i've read. devs put some features in game and you say you should not use them roflmao. you cant hide a failure by not talking, its still there even you dont talk about it.

please, what failure? the cover system was an afterthought, i didn't say you shouldn't use it. don't put words in my mouth and then try to laugh at me. "roflmao". it just wasn't pivotal to the gameplay in any way.

the real failure here is people trying to call ME a shooter, when everyone in the world except a few forum geeks classify it as an action RPG. the fact that you use a gun in a game does not necessitate its place in any of the shooter genres, of which twitch shooting and aiming are staples.the game removes itself from the shooter class by not rewarding the player in any manner for the actual "skill" of shooting. its focus is on the pause-play aspect of the combat, a variation on turn based rpg combat.

I love both of those games, probably my two favorite RPGS of all time.

Ultimately I would say Mass Effect was better, for me. It sucked me into the world more, which is strange since I am a huge Star Wars fan. The main character was likeable and you could be bad without being a homicidal maniac. In Kotor, whether the main character is evil or good, he's still basically the same and I don't like the whole, "Oh at the last minute I decide to be good!" thing you can do at the end of the game.

Still, I don't really see why we need to compare them. They are both awesome games.

Everyone seems to think Mass Effect is an action game. Its not, its an rpg that uses guns instead of swords and so the combat is very fast, very real time, but it is NOT an action game. A friend of mine said it was one of the worst games he had played cause, on the first level, it took him five tries to kill something. and why is that? because he was trying to play it like gears of war, and wasnt understanding that it takes a few shots to kill things cause they have hit points and it was a far slower paced game that what he was trying to play it as. Deal with it, Mass Effect, while not the greatest RPG ever made is still an RPG and a very good one, and I personally praise Bioware for taking a sci-fi approach that didnt feature any kind of sword, energy or otherwise.