Is the first Mass Effect still worth playing?
Yes
94.6% (434)
94.6% (434)
No
5.4% (25)
5.4% (25)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Question regarding the Mass Effect Trilogy

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

The First game is easily the worst, but that's mostly because a very strong point in Mass Effect is seing the result of your choices in the previous games, which for obvious reason isn't present here.

It's still good though, and you'll probably like it a lot the first time you play it, I just think you'll like it a lot tless then 2 & 3, but definetly play it, 2 & 3 aren't nearly as fun, otherwise.

Seems like a troll thread. Skip the first one? If someone said that they could only play one then the answer would be to just play the first one. The narrative and "universe" are very well constructed, while 2 & 3 just feel like "games" set in said universe.

Also, someone said that the Citadel seemed lifeless, and I don't agree. The Citadel is supposed to seem a bit alien and distant because humans are new to it AND it's Shep's first time there. The odd music suits it perfectly.

First Mass Effect is best Mass Effect

gmaverick019:
I definitely gotta say it is my favorite of the three, and no the combat isn't that bad, it's built around being an rpg, not a shooter (opposite of me2 and me3, which is fine in hindsight)

This. The first Mass Effect is the spiritual successor to Knights of the Old Republic, in both feel and gameplay, and could also be compared to Dragon Age:Origins and Baldur's Gate. It's an RPG with shooter elements, much like the first Deus Ex. Some interesting things can be done with the open environments and power combinations. (Lift/throw) In fact, battles can be won without any shooter gameplay at all (you may have to fire your weapons, though). Due to gameplay being this "open," it doesn't excel in any one area as much as a straight shooter.

On the other hand Mass Effect 2 & 3 are shooters, complete with small corridors, chest high walls, and nerfed powers.

Mass Effect 2 is a far superior shooter, not so much in the mechanics as in the level design.

So, if any game should be "left out," it's Mass Effect 3, and that's without even getting into the ending.

I could write more, but I gotta get to Jersey.

Sure it's worth playing. The ending of ME3 doesn't somehow retroactively destroy the other games. All three are still as awesome as ever.

Are you kidding? The first one is the best. Sure, the gameplay is more awkward, but the way it soaks you into the story makes it the best. I always wondered why the PS3 got ME1 so late. This is one of those series where you have to play it from beginning to end. You don't get the full experience if you don't and it affects your enjoyment of the later games if you don't play it too, cos of how you see the characters are introduced and developed and how their relationships change. And I actually ended up liking the gameplay and it's anti-slickness. Gave the game more grit.

Jezzascmezza:
So my question is: should I bother with the first Mass Effect?

Along with all the other supporting arguments, first chapter, get the whole story, get the setting, yadda yadda.

The final argument is that you should because I worked on it and skipping it would make me a sad panda.

And you don't want to make me a sad panda, now do you? ;)

I loved the first one, the second one not so much, and I haven't bothered to play the 3rd one.
I one of the ones who's not too fond of them "CoD-ifying" it. It certainly couldn't hurt to give it a shot and judge for yourself.

Zhukov:
I think it's easily the worst of the three. Worst gameplay, worst characters, worst weapons, worst interface, worst class mechanics, worst graphics, worst level design. You name it.
...

I partially agree with class mechanics, but only if you play as a soldier. It took me 18 months to slog through the game as a soldier. But I played through it again as an adept, and it was easily one of the best experiences in the entire series.

The side missions got repetitive. But the main levels were fun, I thought. Especially Feros and Novera. They were some of the best in the series.

Some old games lose their magic a bit with age and their gameplay becomes stale... Mass Effect 1 is not one of them. I have played it four or five times, the last time was last January/February-ish, before Mass Effect 3 was out. It still works. (At least for me.)

sanquin:

-The mako sucks.

BLASPHEMY!!!!!

Sure it handled like a shopping trolley, but it was a symbol of freedom!

Back on Topic:

I feel a Mass Effect games boils down to 3 things; Story, Gameplay and Characters.

ME1: Good not Great Story. Experimental though a bit clunky gameplay. Good Characters.
ME2: Ok story if you don't think about it too much. More refined but generic gameplay (and still not as good as dedicated third-person-shooters) Good Characters but too many meant that each felt less fleshed out, and having so few returning characters was a missed opportunity.
ME3: Basically ME2 with a better story.

If you have it, you may as well play it :) It's not my favorite game ever, but I did play it twice and that says something.

Zhukov:
Quite a few people consider the first game to be the best.

I am most definitely not one of those people. I think it's easily the worst of the three. Worst gameplay, worst characters, worst weapons, worst interface, worst class mechanics, worst graphics, worst level design. You name it.

However, it's still well worth playing as part of the trilogy. It introduces the setting and many of the central characters. It establishes a lot of the pillars of the story. Also, if you import your Shepard from ME1 to ME2 and on to ME3, a lot of your previous choices are reflected and referenced. The sequels just aren't the same without that aspect.

If the gameplay gets on your nerves just bump it down to easy mode and blow through the combat.

Sorry, but the second one is easily the worst. Terrible pacing and story construction (The low point is reached and resolved within the first hour.) Most of the new characters are hilariously flawed (Miranda the wonder-bitch of zero redeeming quality, and Jacob the poorly characterized, every day schlub.) It also does nothing to advance the overall plot of the trilogy, it's basically just Shepard fucking around with generic looking aliens in a seemingly limitless number of brown linear hallways, at the end of ME2, Shepard is right back where we left him at the end of ME1, the reapers are on their way and Shepard has to stop them!.

The RPG elements may have been obtuse in the first one, but they were practically token in the second. The third managed to strike a great balance, but the second is easily the worst of the three, and i'll stick to my guns on that. The only places I will concede to the game being better are in general gameplay (Although the regenerating health was more of a detriment if you ask me) and being given frequent enough savepoints. (If I had a dollar for every time I died only to discover my last autosave was a half hour ago in ME1...)

All three games have their strong points that the others aren't quite up to snuff.

1 excels in setting, and grand scale story telling. It's the kinda of story that feels more like something out of an epoch of a book series than just a game. The Character strength is there and fleshed out, but some of them fall flat as no one was certain at the time that it'd sell well enough to make a sequel, and so a few corners were cut to reinforce the more obvious and easily reached points of the game. The combat's use of an overheat system means you will NEVER run out of ammo, but careless use of your weapons will leave you in a jam for a short period. one that could be disastrous. the Ability to apply modded ammo was a huge boon if you had a good variety to choose from, making any weapon viable against any threat with a single trip to the menu. This game has two major DLC's though only one is of particular interest for carry over saves. Both are worth having though.

2 Excels in character driven story, and both succeeds and fails at making improvements to combat. It's more mobile than 1's, and the variety of guns do feel more defined from each other than in 1, were an AR was an AR regardless of stats. However, the introduction of limited ammo and shared cool down for powers/abilities is a REAL issue with a lot of fans of 1's combat, like myself. The introduction of Ammo effects as Powers eliminates the RNG factor for ammo types the last game relied upon, but then make your ammo options limited and defined by who you have with you. This game's plot DLC's all play well into the next game, as well as stand alones that they are. Truly worth the investment in all the DLC's.

3 .... 3 is something... If you are like many players before you, and you get attached to the lore and whats actually going on, and what happens to characters? Then this game is going to be hitting you in the gut, repeatedly. Especially if you're a paragon player. In a good way. Combat is further refined, and the guns even more varied feeling, making weapon choices even more important beyond what gun hurts most. Lore wise though, while 2 kinda starts bending it's own lore, 3 kinda takes lore around how biotics and mass effect fields work, and just pretty much breaks it over it's knee and just uses "Biotics" As "space magic" which while leading to fun and enjoyable powers, is something a sour note for those of us who loved 1's fairly hard science based lore. The Multiplayer actually plays well, though you may feel a bit overwhelmed till you adjust to the difference between single and multi player modes.

that said, 3 is a fantastic game, wonderful and well made, up until the final act. The final assault on Earth plays well, but once you get blasted and start, what we now call, " the slow march" the game kinda just sinks right into the toilet, but *shrug* Their ALL worth playing, and the DLC's as well.

It's worth playing. Don't do any of the side stuff if you can avoid it, they all take place in a couple copy-pasted environments with different enemies, basically a sort of mine and a sort of warehouse. But the story gets nice around the point when you leave the citadel and start actually doing stuff. It's opposite to the second one in that the plot is good and important while the characters are flat and boring. in Mass Effect 2 the plot is useless and irrelevant, but the characters you interact with are that much more fun(even if most of them are pretty terrible people) and the main focus is on them instead of the overall story. I haven't played 3 yet, but if you don't mind the main gameplay being a pretty boring shooter the first ones are good experiences. Does the compilation come with DLC? Because I'd recommend playing Lair of The Shadow Broker.

Yes you should, even if it is outdated it's still a great game and having played it will make you appreciate the other two more. Even meeting side quest npc's that you have helped in previous games is amusing, not to mention seeing the bigger decisions come into play as you progress through the story of these games. Also download that free ME3 ending DLC if it's not included, it turns the ending from 'what the hell is this?' into 'meh'.

Zhukov:
Quite a few people consider the first game to be the best.

I am most definitely not one of those people. I think it's easily the worst of the three. Worst gameplay, worst characters, worst weapons, worst interface, worst class mechanics, worst graphics, worst level design. You name it.

However, it's still well worth playing as part of the trilogy. It introduces the setting and many of the central characters. It establishes a lot of the pillars of the story. Also, if you import your Shepard from ME1 to ME2 and on to ME3, a lot of your previous choices are reflected and referenced. The sequels just aren't the same without that aspect.

If the gameplay gets on your nerves just bump it down to easy mode and blow through the combat.

Zhukov here basically shot it out of the park with his post. The first is the worst by far, but the series just isn't the same without playing it first. So do play it, but rush through it so you can get to the good stuff (AKA 2 and 3). :P

If you were going to play the whole trilogy, I'd recommend getting the Genesis comic and starting with 2. The comic itself is pretty crap, but once you have the necessary main choices, it's kind of difficult to put yourself through ME1 since so much of the gameplay is just tedious and awful.

That said, if you get into the right mindset, you can have a blast with it just as much as the other two, plus there's always the significance of going through the whole trilogy, rather than just the two good ones.

Jezzascmezza:
-snip-

If you don't mind gameplay that can be shoddy and is really unbalanced (you should look up some guides and definitely not play soldier), some boring environments and not the best graphics. Because it has a great story, great characters and the best damn last few missions in any western rpg. (Virmire and onward is amazing) I was enthralled by a particular plot point where you meet a certain character, and the end credits song is amazing too.

It has a certain magic that was lost in 2 and especially 3. People say that 5% of ME3 was bad and the rest was great but I say ME3 is 99% bad (Javik is awesome, still) and ME2 70% bad. The gameplay rewards you quicker and theyve made it more flashy, but the story stops making sense immediately in the intro to ME2.

Zhukov:

I am most definitely not one of those people. I think it's easily the worst of the three. Worst gameplay, worst characters, worst weapons, worst interface, worst class mechanics, worst graphics, worst level design. You name it.

I agree with this. At times ME1 was a chore to play. The game play was terrible in every way.

ME2 was my favorite, if the scope wasn't as large as ME1. ME3, well, ya know.

It's funny how people here are either saying ME1 is the best or worst of the three. I guess that shows you that whether you will enjoy it or not is completely up to your tastes and whatnot in gameplay and storytelling.
Personally, I think ME1 is by far the best one. I've played it front to back, every sidequest at least 15 times. ME2 got dry and mechanical after 4 or so runthroughs. Somehow for me ME1 never got tired. ME3 is shit in comparison. Sure, 3 is flashier and cleaner, but it's just so lifeless, somehow. Never even finished my second run of ME3, it's just so robotic.

I'm not going to say that the first game's gameplay sucks, but it is very apparent that the next two just have better gameplay.

I was trying to get my friend into the series, but he would be playing it on an Xbox even though I was introduced to it via the PC. I told him that it shouldn't be a problem having tried out Mass Effect 2 on the 360 knowing that it was a very smooth play and a lot of fun even on a console. Together, he and I played Mass Effect 1 on the console for the first time, and it was ridiculously clunky and awkward. He loved the story (despite thinking some of the characters could have been written better) but was getting extremely frustrated with the shooter aspect of it, and I had no clue why everything was working so horribly. I swore to him that the other two had much better gameplay and that he had to just trudge through this one.

He was polite and said it wasn't too bad with a forced smile on his face, but after he completed the first game and started up Mass Effect 2, he immediately called me saying "Holy shit, it's like night and day, man. I'm having a blast with the second one, and I think the story and character development so far is even better. You were right man, I didn't want to be rude, but I really did think the first one was ridiculous with its gameplay."

Truth be told, Mass Effect 2 does have better design and streamline when it comes to the shooter aspects of it, but I still think I had such a hard time getting acclimated with the first one again simply because I was spoiled by the better control and funner gameplay of the other two. Even so, it still works and gets the job done.

Like I said, I don't think its accurate to say that the first game's combat sucks. It's just that the other two have better combat and gameplay design.

The trilogy as a whole has achieved what few other franchises have accomplished; a really immersive game universe, with races that aren't just generic archetypes and characters that have depth, meaning and plot arcs that aren't retarded. Each individual title has its weaknesses, and honestly as standalone products I can think of better games, but as a *whole package* they're hard to compete with.

The first one feels the most dated out of all of them (obviously) - rather large improvements were made to the combat, inventory and stat systems in future installments, so they don't feel quite as bad to play through. If it's really a big deal for you, set combat to Easy, pick Soldier class, and max out your paragon/renegade chat options and breeze through a quick shooter game with lots of great story. Your choices will port over to later games, so it's worth playing the first just to make sure the game doesn't kill off characters you might want to have sex with later.

First Mass Effect was the best, story-wise. Second was best gameplay-wise. The third one was a bit too action-y compared to the first two.

Put it simply, if you don't then you get a predetermined set-up for 2 where humanity are viewed as arseholes (or at least i got that every time i started a new charcter). plus there quite a bit of it that effects the 2 and the third game (including the DLC).

1st one is still probaly my favourite in the series mainly because it's RPG unlike 2n and 3rd, well 3rd took some steps back towards to the whole RPG thing but 2nd was just plain shooter with RPG bits taped to it and a lot of dialuoge or maybe it just felt like tehre was a lot of it because it didn't fit well with all the shooty-shooty action and chest high walls.
Also in retrospect the meko wasn't that bad, it was actually pretty damn fun unless you had to enter a firefight with it. One thing I have to admit though the side quest in ME1 were a fucking chore especially the ones in citadel although they got only a little better in the sequels.

The first one is good if you remember two things:
1. Biotic is crap, play a soldier, you can change your class when you import to the second and third games.
2. Shotguns are way overpowered, and are initially more accurate than assault rifles

I think that all of the important points have already been said, but there are two that I would like to reiterate:

1. The story of the first one, especially at the end, is *really* good. It's really exciting to have everything come to a head at this point, and... it's difficult to describe, but I'd say that the story at the end of ME1 was the best in the series, despite its lackluster gameplay.

2. ME1 was designed to get you immersed in the vibrant universe of Mass Effect as completely as possible. The other two were designed to carry on with the knowledge that you've accumulated, so you won't get as good an experience out of ME2 & 3 if you skip it. I'm sure that they would do a good job of getting you into it anyway, but you'd really be missing out.

Judging by the poll numbers, I would say you have your answer. Here's my two cents.

To me, Mass Effect was the best game overall. The controls are a bit odd and you end up with sooooo much stuff in your inventory that it starts to feel cluttered and you have no idea what to do with anything. The graphics are probably not going to wow you now either, as you said. And the Mako is going to give you a headache.
But the story is the best. The universe feels expansive and big. There are mysteries out there that the game never explains, adding to that feeling of exploration. Watch Yahtzee's review of Mass Effect 3 and he'll explain exactly what I mean.
The biggest reason to play Mass Effect though is because of how it links into the other two games. Yes, there are certain choices that you can ONLY make if you've played the first game, but there are little details in 2 and 3 that will not be there if you don't have them from Mass Effect. Conrad's appearances in 2 and 3 are amazing. There's also extra dialogue in both games if you have a save from Mass Effect. So I would certainly play it, and try to get as many of the side quests done as you can for all the extra goodies.

The first one is worth playing, however it doesnt have as much replay value IMO since on subsequent playthroughs it can start to drag.

The sidequests are on the whole really boring, the main quest is where most of the effort clearly went, and yet most of those missions are still pretty boring, with the exception of Ilos and the last level which I wont spoil.
The loot system is also annoying as hell, its like Borderlands if everything felt exactly the same and looked exactly the same.

When you play ME1 (Because you really should), just play it on easy and with a soldier. The AR gets ridiculously OP and means that you can kill everything quick and easy so that the combat does not drag. In ME2 you get to chose a new class anyway.

Agow95:
The first one is good if you remember two things:
1. Biotic is crap, play a soldier, you can change your class when you import to the second and third games.
2. Shotguns are way overpowered, and are initially more accurate than assault rifles

I cant argue with your second point since I make a point to avoid shotguns since they make the game super easy, but Biotics in ME do not suck, if you spec out your Shepard right you can easily become a Biotic god

sunsetspawn:
The narrative and "universe" are very well constructed, while 2 & 3 just feel like "games" set in said universe.

Also, someone said that the Citadel seemed lifeless, and I don't agree. The Citadel is supposed to seem a bit alien and distant because humans are new to it AND it's Shep's first time there. The odd music suits it perfectly.

I do like this post, so I'm going to quote you right back and do a "this"

the 2nd and 3rd ones feel like games shoe horned into the universe, while the first one felt like being in a living & breathing universe.

idon'tknowaboutthat:
It's funny how people here are either saying ME1 is the best or worst of the three. I guess that shows you that whether you will enjoy it or not is completely up to your tastes and whatnot in gameplay and storytelling.

Yeah, like I said people have a tendency to attach to the first game in a series that they have played. For most people Mass Effect 1 was there first Mass Effect game so they hold it above the other ones despite the improvements. What I mean is I don't think it's much "tastes" as it is nostalgia.

If you played Mass Effect 2 then Mass Effect 1 and liked it more, I would like to hear why. If you played 1 then 2, your opinion means less to me. Just me but if you say the first game you played in any series is the best, you better have some damn good reasons why.

Yes...? But one thing you will be missing is the hope that any of your choices matter. For me that was a major component of the games, wondering if what I do in one game will result in massive consequences for the next. As in storyline-altering ones. But now we know that doesn't happen, it's still worth playing, but not nearly AS worth playing.

Why would you 'not' play it? :/

It gives you 15 - 20 hours of additional understanding and back-story, which makes 2 and 3 even better to play.

sunsetspawn:
Seems like a troll thread. Skip the first one? If someone said that they could only play one then the answer would be to just play the first one. The narrative and "universe" are very well constructed, while 2 & 3 just feel like "games" set in said universe.

I'm definitely not trolling.
I'm completely new to the series, and had heard things about the game-play experience of the first Mass Effect being rather clunky, especially by today's standards, so I was simply wondering whether it was worth my time putting up with said game-play, as well as dated graphics, in order to get and understand the first act of the story.
Judging by everyone's responses, it seems as though it is.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here