What Was The Best Mass Effect Game?

Mass Effect 3. Best gameplay, therefor, best game !

I'd have to say that I think ME3 is overall the best.
Although I think the original hold its own quite well in it's own way, and the stroy was the best in the first one too.

Loved all of them, but 3 was pretty epic!

mass effect 1 over 2 by far. 2 epitomized game casualization and took away what few rpg elements and customization there were. turned it into a linear 3rd person shooter. lots of unwanted handholding.

I have yet to play the third because mass2 was such a disappointment to me. (and, I've researched enough about it to know what to expect, gameplay-wise.)

I will play it when the price is below 9.99 used.

Have to say it's a toss up between ME1 and ME2

Mass effect 2 cmon guys there's no arguing it

Linear 3rd person shooters >>>>>>>> RPG's with crap gameplay

For me the Problem with Role Playing Gameplay is the differences between the classes or even the skills are not pronounced properly, this was very annoying in the 1st Mass Effect. Yes it had more Role Playing goodies like Attributest and loot and weapon mods and what not, but in Practice, it was Redundant as hell, barely a difference Overload and Warp or Push and Singularity. Not to mention 90 percent of the Enginneers skills is just throwing grenade (which fail to detonate sometimes)

@speedfreak48t5p:

all rpg's better than linear 3rd person shooters with crap gameplay. there, that was what your comment amounted too. feel better now?

Linear 3rd person shooters with good gameplay >>>>>>>>> RPG's with crap gameplay.

horrible rpg's better than all 3rd person shooters. we can do this silliness all day.

and, it still won't change the fact that mass2 was a huge step for the dumbing-down lovers, casualization relishers and good, quality developer handholding approvers.

first one. i actually enjoyed exploring the planets in the mako (beats scanning anyway). i also prefer the normandy SR1 over the SR2. gameplay was not to shabby either.

mass effect 2....to be honest, story wise, i dont know why it exists. seems a bit pointless. i would have had ME 3 with parts of ME2 made into ME2 with ME3 focusing more on the aftermath of your decisions (basically all of ME 3 would be the ending). there were too many characters brought in for Me2 and many were under developed (the ally geth was criminally underdeveloped). i would have brought in 2-3 new characters from that roster to expand on the Me 1 one. also SR1 was destroyed in ME2...didnt like that :P.

ME 3, story wise, was a screw up. bioware had to pull a lost since it sunk in that they got themselves into an unwinnable scenario. so it was a cop out. the whole focus on cerberus was just silly...the reapers were almost pushed into the background for a lot of the game. it was fun to play and more focused though so i probably would prefer it over 2. the sense of urgency in the game was also well done but i would have preferred that in two with 3 dealing with the aftermath in a more open ended game.

Replaying them all atm (I'm on ME2 now), so I'll let you know in a day or 2 when I finish ME3 again =P

is me3 that short?

@ udUbdaWgz1

Yeah, but it feels like such a drag sometimes.

Such a hard question or me since I loved every single one, but I had the most fun with Mass effect 2.

brb replaying ME2 for the 10th time. Everything was right on with that game, ME1 had a lot of problems primarily with the gameplay(guns, aiming) and ME3 was rushed, both great games but just not as good as 2.

ME 2 > ME 3 > ME 1

Don't get me wrong, ME 1 had the strongest story of the series but the combat and driving the Mako on damn near every planet you land on was pretty lackluster and felt like a chore.

ME3 has the best overall gameplay but the weight factor for weapons affecting powers felt like a tacked on handicap that didn't need to be there.

ME 2 had the perfect balance between story, fun, consequences and the most epic final mission of the series.No quest in the series is fucking with that Suicide Mission. Lair Of The Shadow Broker was the shit as well.

Tough to choose one over the others as they were each fantastic but I would go with ME3. Best gameplay of the bunch with some pretty epic moments plus the multiplayer was an excellent addition to the franchise.

2 > 1 > 3

ME3 was the best up until the last 10 minutes. At least the CItadel DLC was awesome. That sort of made up for the awful ending.

I had the most fun with Mass effect 2.

ME games are really not that long...it's the endless exploration that takes forever. Once you kind of know where everything is you do a mission in 3 minutes (not going to play in Insanity or anything, just replaying them to freshen up the story this time). Plus, I am off work for the next 3 days and the wife is gone until Monday...might as well enjoy myself =P

I like the first one the best. It was the best balance between RPG and shooter. There are better third person shooters out there. The ME2 story is over all junk with my most hated cast in any game.

Mass Effect 2 undoubtedly!

It's kinda funny how some ppl refer ME3 as the best game of this franchise!

ME2 is just brilliant in every imaginable aspect with an awesome ENDING, meaningful RPG elements , the decisions have impact on the ending , u feel that gratifying sense of being a leader ....

Mass Effect 3 was the best game in the series in my opinion. It had the best gameplay and (I know I might get flamed for this) the best story if you understood/accepted the ending for what it was. I chose the Red ending with high enough EMS while playing as ruthless.

In the end it doesn't matter whether I believe in those 1 hour "Indoctrination theory" videos on youtube. I chose the "get the job done, no matter the cost" profile in the beginning of ME1 and that's exactly how I finished ME3.

I haven't played me3 yet but 2 was definitely better than 1 imo.

A few months ago I would have said ME2 by a country mile but after my most recent playthrough of the trilogy I'd say that ME1 just edges it.

ME2 is massive and cinematic but loses a bit of the RPG elements and turns into more of a cover shooter for my liking. That added to the fact that the collectors just seemed like a crap filler enemy while we waited for the reapers to arrive. Sovereign was such an awesome antagonist to boot and meeting the NPCs for the first time was just simply amazing.

I may just change my opinion again soon as I've just bought all the DLC (Omega, Citadel, From Ashes and Leviathan) for ME3 so they may just push it to the top spot.

The first one had the best story, the second had the best characters and improved gameplay, and the third one had the best overall gameplay. So all three had elements of being the best. If I had to pick one I guess ME2 was my favorite.

To anyone accusing Mass Effect 2 of being too cover shooty, did you not notice all the shooting in the 1st game ? Mass Effect is even more shootier than its sequels because of the long individual cooldown periods for each special abilties. As opposed to ME 2 where the cooldowns are lumped together and the short cool down durations only 3 seconds long for normal Abilities, I think the longest possible recharge is 12 seconds for things like Barriers and Cloaks, but you can level up and reduce the cool down to 6 seconds.

Mass Effect 3 went one step further with the weight system, which allowed you to fire off special abilities with virtually no down time, you could even rely on the speciall abilities alone.

I'm hoping the Future of the Franchise makes the difference between the class more pronounced in gameplay like in Mass Effect 3 instead of just on Paper like in Mass Effect 1.

This one of the biggest problems in Role Playing Games and goes beyond Mass Effect . Theres a divide between people who want RPGs to go back to the good old ways when you had Attributes and Skill Stats for everything and those who want more Practical Action Oriented methods. I'm all for the practical oriented methods as this is what video games specialise in. I believe now that Role Playing has transcended from Table Top to Video Games, they should change accordingly to best take advantage of the medium.

I want a Mass Effect game where the Biotic and Engineer classes can do away with Using Guns all together, I want the Infiltrator class to be more pronounced and use stealth. I want the Vanguard guards and Sentinals to Specialize more in CQC and Demolition. And most importantly I want see it in gameplay, not on paper.

"The Best Story" ? with THAT ending?

I'd like an elaboration ....

@Lulu_Lulu:

yes, mass1 was a more-rpg-like shooter that had character development choices that impacted one's choices to a much higher degree than in mass2. now, i'm NOT saying mass1 is this deep and well-honed rpg, lol. not in the least, but, for me, the changes they made in 2 were almost exactly what I was afraid of and didn't want. still a good game when I compare it to most of the junk released these days, but, much less fun and meaningful than 1. for me. imo. ;)

as for some of your suggestions, lol, heck yes. those are some things many of us thought we see DEVELOPED in mass2. instead, the entire core of the game was simplified and chopped and streamlined.

and, as to your rpg views: I will not get into that here, since, that looks like it deserves an entire thread to its own :), but, I find the major problem to be that rpg's are very hard games to develop if depth, customization and meaning have priority. attributes and skill and stat management is, or, at least, should be a very complex system that impacts a game and developing character to the nth degree. meaning, just changing one number or say groups of 5, whatever, will impact gameplay significantly.

why? because attributes are the very CORE and NECESSARY ingredients to a pc and to all human beings. that's why they are called attributes, lol, and, NOTHING can replace them in a game, since, THEY IMPACT EVERYTHING ELSE. perks don't replace them. combining different aspects into generic health, endurance and magicka categories doesn't replace them. you take a perk or a category and attributes will change THEM. not the other way around. and, this should impact all gameplay IF IF IF the devs know how to create a good game :)

Just finished Mass Effect 1 and I enjoyed it quite a bit.

Things I didn't like: Bad AI (team wise) and that it wasn't clear when exploring and side questing would be cut off.

I had most of everything complete but it made me beat the game before I could.

There was once chance when i left citadel to go to the Mu Relay but at that point I was too immersed by the story to do anything else.

All in all great game. 8.5/10

Starting Mass Effect 2 this weekend, Heard a lot of good things...

@ mjorh

Peoples Beef with the ending has got more to do with choices not mattering than it does with the story about thing ending its self. Atleast thats my theory. It had a great story.

@ udUbdaWgz1

although Mass Effect 2 was simplified and more streamlined, dare I even say Dumbed down, than Mass Effect 1, It had more depth in practice than the 1st game did. Things like being able to manipulate the the Explosive Canisters, using Push, Pull and Singularity is much better than the 30 different types of mods you can add to your Armour and Weapons. Its just complexity for the Sake of Complexity, theres no depth in that. I'm really not a big fan of Multiple versions of a single concept like the Biotic Barrier and Shields, they are the same thing, a regenerating hoop one has to jump through before they have access to health or armor (which are also the same). I call it a "hoop" because its kind of annoying when you need to use warp for one and overload for the other. It just seems unecessary.

Plus Mass Effect 2 introduced the Infiltrator, a more sneaky type Class that can briefly turn invisible to avoid detection (I use this to go behind enemies, where they have no cover) and special ability where aiming through your sniper rifle's scope slows down time for two seconds. Other than that, it was pretty much like the others and I think that alone puts it ahead of Mass Effect 1.

As for things like Character Developement, I'm not a big fan of that. I'm all for cusomizing but progression just seems unbalanced.

I agree, all games have stats and attributes, and that will never change, but in other genres they keep them under the hood and the Player can change or manipulate them, they are static and seemingly non-existant. It allows one to analyze scenarios more practically than statistically.

Well thats just me. Everybody has a few of their own features they would like to change. I wonder if Project Spark lets you do that.

ME2>>ME>>ME3 for me

@CTR360:

how do i get by the obvious simplification of number 2? rpg elements aside, the handholding is inexcusable. do i look like a teenager? do i look like a casual gamer? what made you think your help was desired?

that's the stuff that i will never understand from sheep and those who pay no attention.

ME2 the best of the series for me the end its epic

so, let me jump in and say that number 2, the game i feel is the most "polished" and non-rpg and generic and typical 3rd person shooter and typical, boring bioware story, is the favorite.

i'd rather take a risk and fail, then, gut and succeed.

and, i haven't even played 3, yet. 2 is the most typical, uninventive, redundant, copycat game I've seen in the games i love.

wow. i guess fluff, advertisement, less and less and less and fewer choices resonates.

lol, i will never let a subpar game like masseffect 2 (tlou), or gta4/5 (or, creed1) overrun the original.

I bet they are also the one that whine about how all the games feel the same.

I do agree ME2 story suck. It suck so much that I was not planning on getting ME3 until I played DA2 and got a little hopeful for a better game.

I loved all. But ME2 is my favourite.

@wiouds:

story is the bottom, gameplay is top.

@udubdawgz1: Too bad I like ME2 game play the least out of the three. I enjoyed the game play from the first one more.

I did like they add JRPG like enemy weakness to ME2.

Also, I like the new ammo system they added in.

Mass effect 2 was also great but mass effect 3 have that charm in it which none of the series game had before.. for eg. multiplayer

Yeah the story was great , no doubt , BUT not the best story of the franchise ," Story" is not jus narrative , it should be perfect in all aspect then u can refer to it as a great story , u see in the ME2 everything was great about the story not just the narrative or sth , i seriously didn't like the character developments in ME3 ,actually in comparison to ME2 it was so poor!

Recall the last mission of Mass Effect 2 , it was epic , it was thrilling , it had an incredible conclusion to all the stuff that u had done during the game play , so streamlined , without any confusion and being like "what the hell happend?" !

Mass Effect 3 was just all about narrative , when it comes to story. it had a better game play but man " Story is the soul of a game" , especially in this genre ,

Since when multiplayer is the "Charm" ?

Actually, multiplayer was a terrible add on to the game ....EA is to blame here tho!

though, i'm not surprised, I am deflated: I want intelligence and innovation.

portal is a great game and it won't happen with you people and your attitudes: I despise anti-consumerism.

independent survey: how many of you people played creed1 without a hud all the way through? serious question with serious consequences unlike typical yap against quality gameplay.

ME2 and good characters...Are you kidding me?

Is the most emo and whiny cast I have seen in any game. I avoiding the entire cast and try to get by without talking to them.

ME2 story as a whole is not that good.

@ wiouds

They did have good Characters. Not to mention Mass Effect 1 had its fair share of mediocre characters, Like Kaiden and Liara. Kaiden was so empty and lacked personality, that the only time I managed to get a rise out of him was when he found out I was two timing him with Liara. I get that liara is young and somewhat anti-social (towards different species) but she was much better as the Vengefull Information Broker in ME2 than she was a the Innocent Scientist in ME1. However her character came a long way in ME3, particularly when she made those "Black Boxes" to send throughout the galaxy. That really moved me. And lets not forget Sovereign, look I get the appeal of a villain so powerfull that he's beyond comprehension, but thats just a lazy cop out not to come up with a better anagonist. Saren was good though.

Miranda, Jack, Jacob, Samara, Thane, Grunt and Legion are also just as good as any of the other characters you meet in ME1 despite your short time with them, although I didn't like Jacob's "follower" mentality. Thane, Jack, Grunt, and Especially Legion brought good Diversity to the team aswell.

ME2 had a shitty villain though. Even though Saren was a Reaper puppet, he had depth and was a totall contrast to the zombie like collecters. But Harbinger and Sovereign were both Equally stupid, Infact this whole Reaper bullshit was bound to end in disaster.

But where ME1 had Saren, ME2 had TIM. I know he wasn't a villain and has zero backstory, but he's definately a legitmate character. He's mysteriousness is downplayed instead of emphasized throughout the game and this helps in the long run compared Sovereign's Arrogance, its cool in the beginning but the novelty wears off as he only speaks once throughout the whole game.

Mass Effect 2 it had an amazing cast of characters,Loyalty Missions were cool and the Sucide Mission was great too. I also perferred the gameplay in 2 much more than 1 even though 1 had some great things. Mass Effect 3 was also great too but it was let down by it's ending and felt like you got their really quickly.