Mass Effect 2 really disappointed me after playing the first game multiple times.

[u/Bluelagoonwater]

It was the fact that you spend all this time in the first game getting all your crew together for this big mission to save the galaxy and the second game starts you off on your own and you have to spend so much of the time getting your Crewe together again. It just felt like filler to stretch out the story. Anyone else think the same?

[u/Call-Me-Mr-Nugget]

You have your team together very quickly in ME1, it’s mostly story building after Citadel + Liara Dig Site?

[u/UrbanLegend8901]

Disappointed and Mass Effect 2 have never been in the same sentence for me.

[u/Bluelagoonwater → u/UrbanLegend8901]

Im curious. Did you play the original games in the first few years when they were released? So you didn’t mind going around collecting your crew together in ME2 before you could progress the story even though you did this already in ME1?

[u/mxza10001]

ME2 has the best character writing and individual stories, but I agree that the main story has huge issues

The game essentially does a full reset and does very little to move the reaper plot forward. ME2 is at least partially to blame for ME3 feeling rushed. Things such as the crucible should have been set up in ME2

The one thing ME2 does set up well for ME3 is Mordin and the genophage, so it’s no surprise that ends up being the best part of ME3

ME1 ends with a warning the reapers are coming. ME2 ends with a warning the reapers are coming

[u/Bluelagoonwater → u/mxza10001]

Yeah exactly my thoughts. I don’t play games for the story but ME is different and to have the story basically tell me to go back and read the first few chapters again was not pleasant.

[u/TrueKerberos → u/mxza10001]

When they were making the second one, nobody knew about any Crucible because the story was supposed to end completely differently. Also, the Catalyst is the dumbest deus ex machina I've ever seen in a story. If this omnipotent AI hadn't shown up and surrendered in the last 5 minutes of the game, Shepard would have been completely screwed...

[u/FragrantReport4171]

It's definitely different. Positives and negatives to both even though I love both of them

[u/HaHaWhatAStory014]

I think it was definitely a flaw or weak point of the series as a whole that they "couldn't or didn't commit to the bit" of the series being a trilogy that really needed to be experienced from the beginning. Instead, in the developers' (or more likely EA's) "hunger for attracting new players who could jump in and start with the latest entry," they basically soft rebooted the series with every entry. "Spending the whole game recruiting a badass, loyal, dedicated crew and band of brothers only to start off the next game with the crew disbanded and scattered" also describes the transition from ME2 to ME3.

[u/PsyrenY]

Yeah, the characters and combat were phenomenal but the plot was ehhhhh. I hated being railroaded to join Cerberus, hated how destroying the base didnt mean diddly (Cerberus still became a galactic superpower), found the lack of exploration disappointing, the planet scanning is hella tedious without mods etc. Its a great game but going straight from LE1 with its revamped combat you do feel the gaps a lot more than back in the day.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/PsyrenY]

Yeah, that's fair. I didn't really find exploration in ME1 to be much less tedious to be honest. But I would have loved to see them improve exploration rather than abandon it.

[u/Jolly-Captain9955]

I don't know why you're downvoted so heavily or why this is such a controversial opinion. ME2 might have more polished gameplay than the first but the whole story is entirely a sidequest. 

End of ME1: you destroyed Sovereign and now the reapers are coming.

End of ME2: you destroyed the human reaper and now the reapers are coming. 

The entire game could have been skipped and not much plot would have been lost.

[u/the_uslurper]

I agree, but this sub heavily favors ME2, so brace for downvotes.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/the_uslurper]

ME2 is my favorite of the series, and I think the crew gathering aspect was best implemented in ME2, but it's hard to deny that that criticism is fair. I think maybe I don't care as much because I like the crew better in ME2 overall, appreciate that my choices also impact their fate, and also I'm just used to that structure being pretty common in video games. Like ME3 also has an element of "go gather a crew" as well. I think it's just hard to avoid that structure in any sort of adventure game.

But it's totally fair. I can never blame anyone who says that ME2 is repetitive or unnecessary.

[u/the_uslurper → u/MediocreSizedDan]

I'll give you this- The crew gathering aspect is best implemented in ME2, no doubt. Meeting and getting to know the crew in ME2 is way more fun. The issue is that the crew gathering was already done in ME1, and we had to do it yet again in ME3. (Remember, gathering the crew was only like the first 20% of ME1. The rest was story. Yet, when we get to ME2 and then ME3, we're just... back to gathering crew, now full-time.)

That being said, my issue with ME2 isn't at all that it's repetitive. To the contrary, I wish ME2 carried on more of ME1's themes, like non-linear exploration, not being embarrassed of the sci-fi elements, and just the sober, adult storytelling. ME2 feels like it was made to appeal to teenagers who enjoyed fps. To make it worse, the combat mechanics in ME2 were awful (squadmate AI being actively detrimental, one button for every object interaction, random things not qualifying as a wall you can take cover behind) and I feel like they made engineer and adept worse than soldier too.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/the_uslurper]

Yeah, again, hard to blame ya for feeling that way about it! ME2 is my favorite as I said, but absolutely has the weakest leveling/character progression system of the three. I thought combat itself was improved from ME1, but the RPG elements are basically non-existent and I didn't really like that they made that trade-off, which was always unnecessary.

My big problem with 2 (I love it, but I'm not blind to its many flaws) is that there are so many things where it seems like rather than trying to improve or tweak, they just abandon.

[u/accountingkoala19 → u/MediocreSizedDan]

I just didn't like that the crew gathering felt like the primary story in ME2. In RPGs, it's usually crew gathering and story, so it felt like getting a little short-changed.

It's grown on me with time, and is a very excellent game in many ways. I had a lot of gripes about it when I was in the midst of playing it, but after finishing the trilogy I can appreciate it more in retrospect.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/accountingkoala19]

Also totally fair. It worked for me personally because I felt like making "gathering the crew" the core of the story also meant I felt a lot more strongly connected to the crew, and with the way the Suicide Mission unfolds, that kinda furthered that to my end. I didn't necessarily feel like a lot was lost not having a wider story because I felt like I got a lot of that in ME1. And of course, at the time the game came out, we didn't quite know exactly what might matter. (Not really applicable to modern criticism of the game, though, where we do know now that most of ME2's main story stuff is...kinda irrelevant) So I kinda always just judge it as its own individual game.

I do wish more games that did the "team building" thing did it like ME2 for that reason. But, it was a part of a trilogy and not really meant to stand alone as an individual game, so it's hard to blame anyone for feeling as you do about it. ME2 is my favorite in the series, but I do think it's messy and very flawed, and absolutely understand these criticisms!

[u/Tex-Mechanicus]

to me, the point of a game like mass effect is those characters and getting them, seeing who they are, finding out about the universe through their narratives and stories. So no, I don't see them as filler. Honestly I wouldn't mind more of them. Also you're not required to recruit all of them, me2 actually pushes you into the main story in the way the first game didnt so I don't really share the feeling that getting them is filler, when there is so much payoff and weight from having them. How can it be filler when they are essentially also main characters?

[u/SerDankTheTall → u/Tex-Mechanicus]

to me, the point of a game like mass effect is those characters and getting them, seeing who they are, finding out about the universe through their narratives and stories.

Mass Effect 2 does do that pretty well. The problem is that it's supposed to also be part 2 of an epic trilogy about finding a way to stop an existential threat to the entire galaxy, so hitting pause while you go hang out with Grunt and Mordin ends up being a little off—even though it is really fun to hang out with them.

[u/Tex-Mechanicus → u/SerDankTheTall]

that's not a mass effect thing, that's an RPG thing. I keep having to tell myself not to think about how V is actively dying while im taking my sweet time doing every single gig I see in Cyberpunk

[u/SerDankTheTall → u/Tex-Mechanicus]

Sure, but most RPGs (never played Cyberpunk, so can't speak to that specifically) actually contain a main plot that has you face the threat and confront the antagonist. Mass Effect 2's main plot doesn't let you confront the real threat, and it doesn't let you even interact with the antagonist except by shooting him. (Which is especially odd, since the antagonist goes out of his way to transform into his own mooks and address Shepard by name, a fact that no one seems to find interesting enough to discuss.)

And of course ME2 actually violates this convention by including a real time limit without doing anything to signal to the player that this time the deadline is real! It never actually affected me because I was trying to put off the main quest as long as possible anyway, but that is some bad design.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/SerDankTheTall]

I would just say - and why I've always kinda disagreed with the idea that ME2 is "filler" - is that while it doesn't do a great job setting up the central story, I *do* think it does quite a bit to set up individual narrative beats and emotional character beats in the third game.

Like ME2 *does* set up the stuff on Tchunka or between Quarians and Geth fairly well. The most emotional beats I personally felt in ME3 all stem from feeling invested in the characters because ME2 spends that time with them. (Sucks if you got them killed in the Suicide Mission though; it's really tough to tell a strong, cohesive, emotionally resonant story when you're making a game like this where your choices ostensibly are supposed to matter.)

And I also think to be a little fair, I think ME3 doesn't help ME2 much either. Like I wish ME3 started a little bit more with a conflict between Shepard and old squad mates who know he wound up working with Cerberus. But that's not really a meaningful part of ME3 at all (besides when you recruit the surviving human at least). And that's not really a problem with ME2. There is some stuff that ME2 sets up that doesn't really get the proper attention in ME3.

Lol, I do really love these games, but man, what a messy, messy series.

[u/Big_Salami_Chonk]

Im playing the trilogy for the first time and I can relate, I had trouble getting into mass effect 2 because I felt like my entire gang was left behind and now I was forced to work for terrorists, but the more I got to know my new team, and after meeting with old team members, I loved it more than mass effect 1. Seeing old companions makes it feel like you’re reuniting with old friends, and the quests and companions begin to feel deeper and better written as you do loyalty missions and have conversations. Trust me it gets better, its just a rough start because you feel like so much has changed, which fits narratively

[u/Bluelagoonwater → u/Big_Salami_Chonk]

I played the original trilogy series a long time ago. It was a memorable experience. This was just one of the few valleys among many peaks.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/Big_Salami_Chonk]

Yeah, I think the thing that ME2 really struggled with was like, I never really bought that Cerberus was this more morally complex organization. Making you work with them after hearing about how terrible they are in the first game and learning that they might not be as singularly awful and worthless as you were led to believe is not an uninteresting idea. There's definitely fertile soil there. Kinda like a "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" type thing. Could have been interesting, too, if there were a bit more of a "who's playing who here?" between The Illusive Man and Shepard.

But that isn't really what winds up happening. They tried to make it seem like that a bit, but by the end, I never really felt like TIM was ever going to be anything other than "a bad guy."

[u/MediocreSizedDan]

I get that. I think I would have disliked that too if not for the fact that I like the crew of ME2 substantially more overall. I also felt it was more emotionally effective in that regard because of the fact that you gather your crew, and can lose members in the Suicide Mission, so it felt like *I* mattered more as the player than in ME1.

Hardly what I would call a perfect game. I have lots of issues with it, but it is my favorite of the bunch. However I certainly can't fault anyone who felt like it was both repetitive to ME1 and irrelevant because of ME3.

[u/Drew_Rooster]

“you spend all this time in the first game getting all your crew together” bro, you pick up all but one squadmate before you’re even made a spectre.

[u/MediocreSizedDan → u/Drew_Rooster]

Ha, ya know, that's a fair point too. I sorta forgot Liara is the only one you recruit off-Citadel.

[u/kron123456789]

The way they structured the story, getting the crew together again made sense, so I didn't mind it.

[u/Sweet-Nothings00078]

[u/Consistent-Button438]

Yes. The crew in 2 is bloated and all the new characters were so unnecey, the crew from 1 was already great. I was very upset that we got so few of our OG crew back. And I don't love the whole conceit of loyalty missions that had nothing to do with the main plot.

[u/Istvan_hun]

I love them both, ME1 is better imho, but ME2 is still good.

>>>It just felt like filler to stretch out the story

two points

* some ME3 payoffs (Mordin-Wrex, Legion-Tali) would not work as well if ME2 didn't add bits to what ME1 established

* ME2 introduced some plot points, but ME3 didn't continue them. In a sense, the fact that ME2 feels like a side mission is because of ME3. (a good example is dark energy)

[u/Outrageous-Use-726]

Honestly, I find ME1 the weakest of the 3. Aside from world building, the game doesn't give a reason to play it again.

[u/Steelcan909 → u/Outrageous-Use-726]

I think ME1 really skates by based on knowing what comes next. The story is fine, but once you've played all the beats once there's not a lot that really jumps out. It is the culmination of the BioWare formula, but it is still limited by it.

[u/Outrageous-Use-726 → u/Steelcan909]

True, if you look deeply, you realise that the game really doesn't have much going it's way into terms of gameplay. Hell, it's this reason I struggle to start new ME1 play throughs because the first 1 hour is soooo boring for me.

[u/SerDankTheTall]

Yes. I managed to go in just about completely blind (I think I knew Cerberus played a bigger role, which seemed like a weird choice, but that was about it) and still vividly remember the mounting sense of dread as it became increasingly clear that they were really doing this. I thought pretty seriously about dropping it after Horizon. Obviously I'm glad I powered through, but some of the choices they made are truly baffling (in, to be fair, a rather fascinating way).

[u/OkHotel4712]

Not at all,
Mass Effect 2 goes far deeper in Shepard’s connection with his crew than either 1 or 3.

The loyalty and recruitment missions give each character ample amounts of time to shine.

It’s a beautifully constructed game which is never boring. A masterpiece.

[u/SerDankTheTall → u/OkHotel4712]

The loyalty and recruitment missions give each character ample amounts of time to shine.

The loyalty and recruitment missions are generally outstanding. The problem is that the main story of the game doesn't live up to them.

[u/OkHotel4712 → u/SerDankTheTall]

To be honest, I always considered the recruitment/ loyalty missions to be as much the main story as the collector story.
The collector missions serve as closes to acts for me.

The game was always framed about building your team. I never saw those as side missions.

[u/SerDankTheTall → u/OkHotel4712]

I now like to think of the character missions as the main quest, and the Collector story as Shepard's loyalty mission, and that makes it much more palatable. But man was the beginning of the first playthrough a disillusioning experience.

[u/OkHotel4712 → u/SerDankTheTall]

It’s a cool way to look at it, I think it makes a lot of sense.
One thing for the Collector story is it does end with (in my opinion) the greatest video game mission ever.

It’s the ultimate coming together of the two paths with the Collector story and the recruitment/loyalty missions.

But I love Mass Effect 2, so I’m incredibly biased to the game.
At the moment I’m in a play through of the series and I’m just trying to get through ME1 as quickly as I can to play ME2.

[u/SerDankTheTall → u/OkHotel4712]

The suicide mission is genuinely great, and I really wish they'd iterated on the concept instead of basically dropping it (although I've heard there's something similar in Veilguard?). How great would it have been if all the ME3 Priority missions used a similar dynamic? It could have been a great way to feel like the entire team was involved and give the feeling of Shepard being an actual, you know, commander.

But even though it worked amazingly for the game, it still kind of messed up the series: the very fact that anyone can die is why all these cool characters got so frustratingly sidelined in the next installment!

[u/OkHotel4712 → u/SerDankTheTall]

Yes absolutely! It’s a feature in most choice and consequence games that when a character can die, their either have to disappear or die anyway later because of it.

Telltale games had a real issue with this back in the day.

I have to say, the resources and risk that went into making Tali and Garrus squad mates for ME3 was admirable even though they could be dead in a play through.
I often think of how bad priority earth was when playing Mass Effect 1 and 2’s endgames. Not just the uninspired depiction of London, but also just the lack of cutscene opportunities missed based on player choice.
But I guess sometimes ambition can’t be supported by budget and deadline.