By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - IGN: Mass Effect 2 is Better than Uncharted 2 - "Deal with it, fanboy"

joshin69 on 04 February 2010
burgerstein said:
Pokemon Snap for VC is better than UC2 and ME2 put together.
Deal with it, buttfuckers.

Pokemon Snap is better than both those games because in Pokemon Snap you can take pictures of Pikachu and send them to the Wii message board where you can send them to your friends. You can't do this in either UC2 or ME2. And clearly, because I like trading pictures of Pikachu better than shooting stuff, Pokemon Snap is the better game. That's the truth and if you disagree you're a HD fanboy blinded by high res graphics that include no Pikachus or Charmanders.

But that's just my opinion. You buttfuckers.


I think your being a little offensive. Try lover of the behind next time Spanky!



 

 assumption is the mother of all f**k ups 

Around the Network
aragod on 04 February 2010

It's just Greg Miller's oppinion, nothing more, the mistake he made was to state it as a generaly acknowlaged fact.

They are both GOTY materials, but Mass Effect has more depth, while Uncharted better pacing and action, also is a lot more polished. If I were to judge these games now, 3 days after finishing Mass Effect, I'd probably go with it, as it's more recent experience. But if I were to rate these games, UC will get full score, and mass effect couple of points lower.



MY HYPE LIST: 1) Gran Turismo 5; 2) Civilization V; 3) Starcraft II; 4) The Last Guardian; 5) Metal Gear Solid: Rising

Bamboleo on 04 February 2010

You can't spell ignorance without IGN



milkyjoe on 04 February 2010

God, these gaming 'journalists' are getting more immature by the second. By all means, tell us why you prefer one game over another, but don't stick your fingers in your ears and start shouting 'la la la I'm not listening, I'm right, you're wrong'... which is basically what this article does...



VGChartz

Reasonable on 04 February 2010
Grahamhsu said:
Reasonable said:
Twistedpixel said:
Reasonable said:
I like how he closes by admiting that the comparison is like trying to decide which is better, apples or oranges, then claiming that as gamers we must nonetheless make a choice.

Bollocks. Of course we don't, and in this case it's well neigh impossible. Each game is very polished and well made, and neither has many flaws as such. Both are very different however so I do think this is a 'apples/oranges' scenario - i.e. you just can't make that kind of call between two very different 96% close to perfect games.

This smells like classic 'hits gathering' excercise.

You would in your honest interpretation call them close to perfect? Say for instance you had to give either game a score out of 100 with 50 being average, where would you place them aproximately?

Can't say for sure on ME2 until I finish it, but on evidence so far around 94% with Uncharted 2 at 96%.

I rate based on how well the game relates to its own goals and then how good it is technically.  I think both deliver terrifically against their design goals and compared to what's possible with current gen console tech, although so far I've found ME2 to be just that little bit behind technically.  I don't mean graphics as such more looking at frame rate, pop-in, etc.  Uncharted 2 just edges the ME2 engine technically so far for me.

To give some more perspective I'd rate few games 100%, but those that have come very close for me would be:

Ico - 98%

Silent Hill 2 - 98%

Flower - 98%

LBP - 98%

 

Those are the types of games for me that delivered almost perfectly on their design goals and were near enough perfect technically given the console tech they were running on.

 

Umm you've got to be reasonable here =P You just compared a fantastic new engine reused from Uncharted 1 to the Unreal 3.5 Engine...Name me a game without pop-in or has extremely good framerate besides Shadow Complex that uses Unreal. It's a easy win for Uncharted engine always =P

That was their choice.  They could have developed a new engine or a game specific engine if they chose - other developers do.

They decided to use middleware and while I take that into account the fact remains that as a result of their decision technically the game isn't quite as solid.  I am cutting them slack as, to be honest, if I then questioned the relatively small environments vs the ambition of the game vs what is possible I'd drop the score another few points.  Given what ME is trying to be from a design standpoint I'm not sure the Unreal engine was the best choice from a level point of view, although I'm sure it helped them with the shooting design choices.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
AngelosL on 04 February 2010

These 2 games can't be compared ...Uncharted 2 is an action game and Mass Effect 2 a RPG:p The reviewers only prove that they promote the xbox :P



Grahamhsu on 04 February 2010
Reasonable said:
Grahamhsu said:
Reasonable said:
Twistedpixel said:
Reasonable said:
I like how he closes by admiting that the comparison is like trying to decide which is better, apples or oranges, then claiming that as gamers we must nonetheless make a choice.

Bollocks. Of course we don't, and in this case it's well neigh impossible. Each game is very polished and well made, and neither has many flaws as such. Both are very different however so I do think this is a 'apples/oranges' scenario - i.e. you just can't make that kind of call between two very different 96% close to perfect games.

This smells like classic 'hits gathering' excercise.

You would in your honest interpretation call them close to perfect? Say for instance you had to give either game a score out of 100 with 50 being average, where would you place them aproximately?

Can't say for sure on ME2 until I finish it, but on evidence so far around 94% with Uncharted 2 at 96%.

I rate based on how well the game relates to its own goals and then how good it is technically.  I think both deliver terrifically against their design goals and compared to what's possible with current gen console tech, although so far I've found ME2 to be just that little bit behind technically.  I don't mean graphics as such more looking at frame rate, pop-in, etc.  Uncharted 2 just edges the ME2 engine technically so far for me.

To give some more perspective I'd rate few games 100%, but those that have come very close for me would be:

Ico - 98%

Silent Hill 2 - 98%

Flower - 98%

LBP - 98%

 

Those are the types of games for me that delivered almost perfectly on their design goals and were near enough perfect technically given the console tech they were running on.

 

Umm you've got to be reasonable here =P You just compared a fantastic new engine reused from Uncharted 1 to the Unreal 3.5 Engine...Name me a game without pop-in or has extremely good framerate besides Shadow Complex that uses Unreal. It's a easy win for Uncharted engine always =P

That was their choice.  They could have developed a new engine or a game specific engine if they chose - other developers do.

They decided to use middleware and while I take that into account the fact remains that as a result of their decision technically the game isn't quite as solid.  I am cutting them slack as, to be honest, if I then questioned the relatively small environments vs the ambition of the game vs what is possible I'd drop the score another few points.  Given what ME is trying to be from a design standpoint I'm not sure the Unreal engine was the best choice from a level point of view, although I'm sure it helped them with the shooting design choices.

 

True but I'm pretty sure Bioware has never developed an engine that doesn't follow the D20 system. Every single Bioware made engine screams DnD, I don't think they know how to make a different engine.




-=Dew the disco dancing fo da Unco Graham=-

ghaleon1980 on 04 February 2010

Look, we can all agree that these are both incredible games but you know what? Mass Effect 2 is going to run circles around Uncharted 2 in sales.



Reasonable on 04 February 2010
Grahamhsu said:
Reasonable said:
Grahamhsu said:
Reasonable said:
Twistedpixel said:
Reasonable said:
I like how he closes by admiting that the comparison is like trying to decide which is better, apples or oranges, then claiming that as gamers we must nonetheless make a choice.

Bollocks. Of course we don't, and in this case it's well neigh impossible. Each game is very polished and well made, and neither has many flaws as such. Both are very different however so I do think this is a 'apples/oranges' scenario - i.e. you just can't make that kind of call between two very different 96% close to perfect games.

This smells like classic 'hits gathering' excercise.

You would in your honest interpretation call them close to perfect? Say for instance you had to give either game a score out of 100 with 50 being average, where would you place them aproximately?

Can't say for sure on ME2 until I finish it, but on evidence so far around 94% with Uncharted 2 at 96%.

I rate based on how well the game relates to its own goals and then how good it is technically.  I think both deliver terrifically against their design goals and compared to what's possible with current gen console tech, although so far I've found ME2 to be just that little bit behind technically.  I don't mean graphics as such more looking at frame rate, pop-in, etc.  Uncharted 2 just edges the ME2 engine technically so far for me.

To give some more perspective I'd rate few games 100%, but those that have come very close for me would be:

Ico - 98%

Silent Hill 2 - 98%

Flower - 98%

LBP - 98%

 

Those are the types of games for me that delivered almost perfectly on their design goals and were near enough perfect technically given the console tech they were running on.

 

Umm you've got to be reasonable here =P You just compared a fantastic new engine reused from Uncharted 1 to the Unreal 3.5 Engine...Name me a game without pop-in or has extremely good framerate besides Shadow Complex that uses Unreal. It's a easy win for Uncharted engine always =P

That was their choice.  They could have developed a new engine or a game specific engine if they chose - other developers do.

They decided to use middleware and while I take that into account the fact remains that as a result of their decision technically the game isn't quite as solid.  I am cutting them slack as, to be honest, if I then questioned the relatively small environments vs the ambition of the game vs what is possible I'd drop the score another few points.  Given what ME is trying to be from a design standpoint I'm not sure the Unreal engine was the best choice from a level point of view, although I'm sure it helped them with the shooting design choices.

 

True but I'm pretty sure Bioware has never developed an engine that doesn't follow the D20 system. Every single Bioware made engine screams DnD, I don't think they know how to make a different engine.

True, also a score of 94% from me ain't bad!  I'm actually impressed in the improvements in ME2 over ME1.  ME1 in truth was a little rough round the esges technically, looking very much like a developer trying to get an unfamiliar engine to do what they wanted.  ME2 is a very good Unreal based game I think, much better than most technically, and shows the difference in experience and confidence they now have on the engine.

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

NKAJ on 04 February 2010

i love how he says that they are "apples and oranges " and shoudnt be compared together and then proceeds to tell why mass effect 2 is better....



"They will know heghan belongs to the helghast"

"England expects that everyman will do his duty"

"we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"