this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
9 points (100.0% liked)
Greentext
4437 readers
874 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're in the minority, but you're also correct.
The quality of Mass Effect 1 and DA: Origins came from how polished their stories were. The gameplay was the weakest point of both games. Don't get me wrong, I liked playing them, but they do not hold up. Then, or now.
Both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 experienced the exact same quality shift. Less quality on the story side, better gameplay. In DA 2's case, they might as well have handed the writing off to the interns.
It only got worse after this. We all remember red explosion, blue explosion or green explosion at the end of ME3. DA Inquisition existed, the multiplayer was fun (and similarly the only fun thing, to me, in ME3).
I played every mass effect in a row like a year ago and honestly the gameplay is still good. It's nothing really that involved and it's definitely a lot more interesting by Andromeda. But the original was still good honestly.
I liked it. You liked it. I still think Origins is fun.
However, there's a reason the gameplay shifted from what it was to where it ended. Many people thought both ME1 and DA:O were bad, gameplay-wise. It's just sad that the story got fucked in the process.
Did anyone think mass effect one was bad? Rudimentary maybe but bad?