With Andromeda just around the corner, I think it's worth looking back at the previous game in the series

With Andromeda just around the corner, I think it's worth looking back at the previous game in the series.

Was it really as bad as people said it was? Did it deserve that reactions it got?

The bad guy is Zenyak from Saints row.

It's not -terrible-, it's just not that good. It's like a 5-7/10

facial animations are fun to meme about but the rest of the game is just subpar to okay, rather than laughably bad

ME1 is good, 2 is ok, 3 is boring as fuck and originally has a shit ending, plus the reapers make no sense at all.

It should have shipped with Javik and the enhanced endings.

I wasn't disappointed with the evolution of Vanguard's gameplay from 2 to 3. You felt like a fucking force to be reckoned with. 3's inclusion of multiplayer was very addicting to me, as well.

That's all I can say good about it. The party was miniscule and rather weak. You didn't get a Krogan on your fucking team. The color-coded ending was stupid. The two extra endings added in the later patch were stupid. I didn't play the dlc, so I can't speak for them.

Post >yfw you remember the ME3 """"endings""""

Control is the only ending.

I'll give it a shot, Inquisition was good with the exception of the Hinterlands and Sera.

>Was it really as bad as people said it was? Did it deserve that reactions it got?
Yes, in terms of story, world building, and character development. If you had any connection to the franchise, especially ME1, then 70% of ME3 was a 0/10.

Gameplay was different and came down purely to preference, ME3 was a generic third person shooter with special powers and ME1 was an old style clunky RPG. It really depends on which type of gameplay you prefer, you can't really say one is better than the other in any objective sense since they're both completely different designs.

The multiplayer was 9/10, only brought down by the retarded box-loot system and need to upgrade guns instead of build characters.

>You didn't get a Krogan on your fucking team
this was dumb. You get Wrex but only as a temporary squad member in one of the DLCs.

Yes. All of Mass effect is trash. The first 1 is less trash and they get trashier from there. Shooting part is shit in every one of them. Writing was ok in the first(tons of ideas from other sci-fi, sterotypical story and characters) and got worse. The whole series is basically a shitty dating sim with lots of dialogoue as a gring mechanic and action filler that you need to trudge trough to advance said dialogue.

I hated the dumbed down gameplay from ME2.
I liked that they made it better in ME3.
I hated the addition of chads in ME3.
I liked Garrus and Wrex.
Most of the DLCs were pretty good.
The ending was not great, but worth the ride.
All in all, Mass Effect is possibly the greatest video game trilogies of our time and only basement rats would disagree.

But hey you get this fucking dipshit James Vega and your boring ass stupid fucking Virmire Survivor. EDI was okay, I guess. I still can't believe ME3 had a worse team than ME1.

3rd was just a shitty Gears clone with rushed development cycle game should've been released within a year after me2, they had to delay it eventually, but it didn't change much. They also lost Karpyshyn so game was doomed from the beginning.
I don't blame bioware tho, it's EA who wanted bioware to release 3 game within one year

It was worse than "as bad as people said it was" as people kept acting like the game was a masterpiece until the last 15 minutes. It's a 6/10 game in a series where both previous titles were 9 or above. And in spite of all that, it'll also probably be better than any ME game released after it.

>The ending was not great, but worth the ride.
>worth the ride
>worth

no it wasnt. for a game that kept forcing the whole "your choices matter!" gimmick through all of its games, it was a huge kick to the face with how they handled it in ME3.

im sure your post was bait but im bored so enjoy the you

Is the gameplay objectively better than the previous games as I hear?

ME1 was a lot of fun. ME2 focused on presentation and action over exploration and world-building and felt much smaller. ME3 took this trend to the extreme. I still like them all, but can't help but hope 2 and 3 were better.

That's why it wasn't great. Also, for your information, not all three choices get unlocked regardless. If you fuck up your choices, you get less.

1 had it flaws, but it was a hopeful game. it needed a better ux for inventory and other misc qol changes. instead they just shitcanned so much and dumbed it down so fucking hard and wasted the world building of 1. what a shame.

Mass Effect was good for a 2007 game despite its flaws (no, it's not a timeless classic).
Mass Effect 2 was dumbed-down TPS garbage made by EA
Mass Effect 3 was multiplayer TPS garbage with shit writing in the SP made by EA
Mass Effect 4 is a soft porn simulator made by a different studio.

Better than ME2.

Different from ME1.

They're not really comparable except ME2 and ME3, where ME3 is simply improved in almost every way.

Zenyak was made specifically to parody this shit if I recall

...

...

...

SCIENCE and shit.