| haxxiy said: The fact a game is better than its sequel doesn't mean it'll score higher. Times change, and concepts and gameplay formulas that were once considered great might become stale. For instance, Pokémon, to which GF is always adding new stuff and reworking old concepts just to keep more or less the same reception they got in the 90s, even though the games are now considerably more immersive and rewarding. |
First, Mass Effect is an action adventure game with RPG mechanics. In no way compare it to Gears, even though Mass Effect 2 and onward were very inspired by the series. Gears is a shooter, thorough and thorough. It has a winning formula that carved a way of play that does not need to be reinvented or changed too much.
I know you're not dissing active reload, the thing is a game on its own, a staple and a perfect metronome for a competitive shooter. That's what immersion looks like in a game that takes multiplayer seriously.
Gears is a Microsoft game, with heavy roots on basing the game around gameplay, instead of putting other elements first like presentation.
