S.T.A.G.E. said:
Three was the worst in truth. It strayed so far from being an RPG to a third person shooter that its not even funny. Mass Effect 1 was a true RPG influenced by KOTOR and built a legacy. 1 and 2 were less linear had more customization and actually followed through with the promise that your decisions mattered. This was the promise of this franchise and 3 dropped the ball hard even though not many games this year can compete with it. |
Being mechanically unsound in terms of combat does not a "proper" RPG make; ME1, 2, and 3 all have similar levels of consequence to player decisions, though in terms of character builds and customization the "RPGness" would definitely go 1>3>2. Your skill trees and skill allotments in ME3 mattered more than in either of the other two games, and so did the particular synergy of how your team worked together in combat (that is, how their powers and power evolutions worked with each other).
3 was basically one long string of "here are the consequences of your actions from the first two games," and it built to nonstop climaxes for character arcs that had been built up for the rest of the franchise. It did things the other two only managed to have in snippets.
ME1's writing is the weakest; its worldbuilding is the weakest; its characters are the weakest; its combat mechanics are the weakest.
Mass Effect is a series that improved as it went along, especially in terms of character writing. I defy you, I defy you to go back and replay ME1, go through the character dialogue with your squadmates - or, God help you, one of the romances, which were pretty much the very nadir of BioWare romance writing - and tell me that it compares favorably to either of its sequels in that regard.







