Grey21 said:
Profcrab said:
CGI-Quality said:
FaRmLaNd said: ME2 is more polished but it removes a lot of RPG features and exploration features I loved in the first game.
Overall ME2 is probably a better game but then again you can't freely explore the citidel which was a huge disapointment because that was the best part about the original game in many ways. |
A HUGE letdown for me. The sequel is definitely more enjoyable, but that kept it from totally winning over the original 100%.
As for Gears 3, yeah, if it's running on the new engine, I expect a massive technical upgrade.
|
I echo that. The same thing happened with KotOR 2 (although it was developed by Obsidian). Less expansive environments in some cases, more confined. I really liked many of the changes in ME2 and it was overall a better game, but I didn't like some of the environmental changes.
I give that post a 9.7.
|
Less expansive environments? Ibstead of copy and pasting the old Citadel they took their time tocreate a new area. Sure it was smaller but the entire Citadel was unneeded everything on their could have been placed on another location. ME1 only had the Citadel, it was big (although small compaired to any city from Oblivion) but it was the only real city area in the game. ME2 has multible cities next to their new Citadel area. So less expansive environments? Perhaps but you should add that there are about 5 times more environments at the same time aswell.
|
I agree with you, there were more environments and they did have to completely redo the Citidel. However, I was dissapointed with having to take the shuttle to the Embassy and the grand view when walking around in the ME1. Again, still loved ME2 and thought they improved the elements that really mattered, the inventory system, and adding the engrossing loyalty missions. As with anything though, there are bound to be some things I would have like to have seen. And yes, the environments felt more confined, even if there were more of them. A small gripe.
I give that post a 9.4.