After a violent death by an unknown force and a timely reanimation by the human supremacist organization Cerberus, Commander Shepard must assemble a new squad in the seedier side of the galaxy for a suicide mission in the second installment of the "Mass Effect" trilogy.
" I don't think you can find a more piece of perfection anywhere on any system better then ME2. "
You absolutely can. They are called Uncharted 2 and God of War 3; and both are PS3 exclusives. "
My point is they are small levels and linear. Look at even GOW3 you can not even turn the camera to look around. It's all scripted so it is way more easy to make those games have great graphics. As a whole package level size game size and content and artistic and animation. And being especially if you load ME2 to the 360 Hard Drive it runs smooth as silk very seamless. As a whole entire package i think ME2 has the edge. "
ME2 is Linear....do not let the " You can pick the planet" Fool you. You are lead down a very narrow path the entire time. Also a lot of ME2 was fluff. The planet scanning bit was very annoying. You are free to think ME2 is the god of games. However you need to be ready to accept what others have to say and at least try to make up a better argument. "
How can you say ME2 is linear? You can go and do and create the story how you want. There is nothing narrow about ME2 you are free to roam the game how you choose.
" I don't think you can find a more piece of perfection anywhere on any system better then ME2. "
You absolutely can. They are called Uncharted 2 and God of War 3; and both are PS3 exclusives. "
My point is they are small levels and linear. Look at even GOW3 you can not even turn the camera to look around. It's all scripted so it is way more easy to make those games have great graphics. As a whole package level size game size and content and artistic and animation. And being especially if you load ME2 to the 360 Hard Drive it runs smooth as silk very seamless. As a whole entire package i think ME2 has the edge. "
ME2 is Linear....do not let the " You can pick the planet" Fool you. You are lead down a very narrow path the entire time. Also a lot of ME2 was fluff. The planet scanning bit was very annoying. You are free to think ME2 is the god of games. However you need to be ready to accept what others have to say and at least try to make up a better argument. "
How can you say ME2 is linear? You can go and do and create the story how you want. There is nothing narrow about ME2 you are free to roam the game how you choose.
"
Not really. The game does not go on in certain points till you do certain stuff. Also the firefights are small. The levels are LINEAR...Again you are free to think this. However no matter how much you try to fight it. There are better games and there are worse games.
Well I am gonna stop here. Not gonna argue any more.
" I don't think you can find a more piece of perfection anywhere on any system better then ME2. "
You absolutely can. They are called Uncharted 2 and God of War 3; and both are PS3 exclusives. "
Wow, God of War 3 isn't even the best game released this month, so there is no way that game is even close to perfection.
While Uncharted 2 was technically great visually, that was about it. The way ME2 accesses old saves, streamlines the whole RPG genre, pretty much revolutionizes the way a story can be told in a shooter, the dialogue trees, character development, branching paths and so much more. It's insane the amount of stuff ME2 does on a tech level and it's still a blast to play.
" I don't think you can find a more piece of perfection anywhere on any system better then ME2. "
You absolutely can. They are called Uncharted 2 and God of War 3; and both are PS3 exclusives. "
My point is they are small levels and linear. Look at even GOW3 you can not even turn the camera to look around. It's all scripted so it is way more easy to make those games have great graphics. As a whole package level size game size and content and artistic and animation. And being especially if you load ME2 to the 360 Hard Drive it runs smooth as silk very seamless. As a whole entire package i think ME2 has the edge. "
ME2 is Linear....do not let the " You can pick the planet" Fool you. You are lead down a very narrow path the entire time. Also a lot of ME2 was fluff. The planet scanning bit was very annoying. You are free to think ME2 is the god of games. However you need to be ready to accept what others have to say and at least try to make up a better argument. "
Mass Effect 2 can still be pretty damn janky. It's not hard to make the character animations go awry. Skip a couple lines in a dialog fast and watch the game attempt to catch up... it always looks herky-jerky and you can get some fantastic bent arm animations out of it. The framerate can get messy in explosive situations, and the lighting and shadows do not compare to Uncharted 2.
Just watch the difference between Elena Fisher and Miranda Lawson in animation. One appears to move because the muscles in her body are creating kinetic energy, and the other moves because the polygons in her body are moving her.
(I love Mass Effect 2, and I'm considering it replacing Uncharted 2 as my best game of this generation... but in terms of tech, it's not a contest)
ME2 is a game whose relatively minor failings have been documented well enough already. Is it, in technical execution, the best game ever released? I think the answer is obviously no, even if it is technically superior to most games out there. I've had all sorts of technical glitches in the game, from camera angle screwups to dropped dialogue, as well as having game saves screwed up by getting caught on level geometry. None of these problems killed my enjoyment of the game, but it certainly has some technical problems (as any game of this size and complexity would).
Graphics are awfully subjective, especially as the consoles become more complicated. For Xbox exclusives, ME2 is certainly among the best looking, but if you don't like the art style, that doesn't mean much. Suffice it to say that ME2's graphics are better than the original game, and the character animations are (in my opinion) unmatched, perhaps to the detriment of the environments. I think that was a conscious choice by the designers.
ME2 is technically superior, yes. But the pinnacle of technical achievement? No.
All of Uncharted and ME2 and GoW3 are quite impressive looking when you consider that they are being run on a console. But if you are looking from a purely technical perspective then I would have to quote this: @Jeffsekai said:
" Crysis is sitting in 2007 laughing at these claims. "
@EliteShadowDog: It's not quite fair to compare Crysis to anything running on the consoles, even though Crysis is from 2007. The 360 was released in 2005, after all. Crysis looks good, but it doesn't exactly run efficiently, even on a great gaming rig. Given the technical specs of the 360 and PS3, I think ME2 is a significant technical achievement. What would Crysis look like if you had to run it on a PC with the same specs? Right. It would look bad. That's not to say Crysis is a bad game (it's really just okay), but they basically threw in all the bells and whistles and hoped that systems powerful enough to play it would come out. They didn't have to work within a limited amount of memory and processing power.
There's obviously some fanboyish exuberance here regarding Uncharted 2 and GoW3. They're both good looking games, but people are claiming there is a huge, obvious leap in quality over what you see on the 360, and I'm just not seeing it. Granted, I don't generally play games like GoW3, but for the little bit I played it, it looked fine, not spectacular. There may be an edge over ME2, but ME2 was never billed as a game with cutting-edge graphics, not the way Uncharted 2 was. ME2 has always been focused on character animation, and I still think it's among the best at this. It still screws up on occasion, but most of the time it's top notch.
I think most of the extra detail they put in games these days is a waste of time anyway. Things go by so fast, and you're focused on the gameplay. Then we sit and judge games by still shots. It seems a bit nuts to me. Both consoles look great. They're five years old now, or nearly so. The graphics are all already looking dated to me compared to what I see on even mid-range PCs (it's been like that for a few years now), so at this point the bragging rights over which console looks better seem silly to me. Given that new consoles are probably at least three years down the pike (if not more) I think debates over graphics quality will mean less and less. Just remember how much advancement was made in graphics for the five years before the 360, and project that advancement into the future. The difference between the consoles is nothing compared to that.
@Garrus: Agreed. The level of depth in the universe and such was kinda... I dont know. I want to be closer to that universe not closer to the sight of a rifle. Oh and making you have less inventory opposed to fixing it was kinda dumb. Loved this game but it just did not have the same shocking twists as the first one. It was as if they were trying to keep the story nice and straight forward as not to scare anyone away with things like "Plot twists" and "Surprises" not just "THAT GUY IS EVIL OR IS HE?"
" Both consoles look great. They're five years old now, or nearly so. The graphics are all already looking dated to me compared to what I see on even mid-range PCs (it's been like that for a few years now), so at this point the bragging rights over which console looks better seem silly to me. Given that new consoles are probably at least three years down the pike (if not more) I think debates over graphics quality will mean less and less. "
From the bottom of my heart I would just like to thank you. This should be the default response for every "360 graphiks vs PS3 graphiks lol" thread on the internet.
@EliteShadowDog: I love both Mass Effect games and while there are definitely moments where superlative art direction shines in both games it's completely fucking ridiculous to say ME2 has better graphics than any of the other games you mentioned. It doesn't and that's a fact. It looks damn good for the type of linear planet/open universe RPG it is but compared to games which use more modern engines and rendering techniques it just doesn't stack up. Oh and Crysis has great charater models, especially in terms of the suits and aliens. The naval commander on the carrier ain't so hot in terms of his shirt creases over his top pockets but otherwise every single character and vehicle model in Crysis puts ME2 to shame and that's in terms of poly counts, shader complexity and art direction. You're deluded.
@Juvarial: Yeah I feel as though if they did the same kind of plot as the whole deal with Saren in the first game it would be too samey but then BioWare are the only people who I think could pull this off with a second story that would actually have been equally as impressive as the first.
@EliteShadowDog: Have you even played Uncharted 2?! Sure the game itself is linear... but the environments sure don't match the gameplay style. The attention to detail in the city sequences, and in the late game jungle were incredible. Plus, apart from some of the eyes, the character models are unmatched.
Don't get me wrong... ME2 looks great... but it's essentially ME1 with a smoother framerate.
@creamypies: I never had any problems with ME1's framerate. It never seemed to drop for me. But you are right: ME2 isn't leagues better in the graphics department over ME1. There are some refinements in character animation. I put the game in this morning to toy around with, and I immediately saw some graphical flaws. Hardly even distracting, but still there. ME2 wasn't hyped for cutting edge graphics, and it doesn't have them. It looks above average for a game on the 360, and it's a hell of a lot of fun to play.
As I've said elsewhere, though, these comparisons between consoles are getting kinda silly. The hardware is five years old. Compared to what I've seen on a friend's new high end PC, both the PS3 and Xbox 360 are complete rubbish. We shouldn't be expecting massive upgrades in graphics in sequels on consoles. Incremental changes at best, maybe.
@Garrus: Lets see what they do round 3. I always give games one bad squeal before deciding not to buy the next one in the series. ME2 wasnt BAD but still. Its got some things that a fan of the first game may find abit off. Ahhh well. Lets see how the refine it even more ME3 eh?
i still think MGS4 was the most technically impressive game. But God of War 3 is insane when it comes to this so i dunno.. and then theres Uncharted 2.
I've said it before, but the OP and many people here have not proved why this game is technically impressive. It's a good game with fun mechanics, but that's NOT the same as being technically impressive. I'd have to give this one to Uncharted or God of war 3.
Strong competitors for this title are some of the gorgeous first-party Nintendo titles, which even on highly inferior hardware can be mind-blowingly gorgeous (see The Wind Waker).
But yeah, haven't played ME2, but size is irrelevant to technically impressive. Amount to interact with that is technically impressive I suppose might be relevant, though. So far for me the title stays with Uncharted 2.
" All of Uncharted and ME2 and GoW3 are quite impressive looking when you consider that they are being run on a console. But if you are looking from a purely technical perspective then I would have to quote this: @Jeffsekai said:
" Crysis is sitting in 2007 laughing at these claims. "
"
crysis doesn't do ANYTHING quite like what goes on in GOW3 and Uncharted 2.
Okay, I think thats a bit of a hyperbolic statement but Mass Effect 2 is indeed a beautiful game. Literally stopped everything and just swung the camera around looking at the game maybe a half-dozen times over the course of it. Really, really sharp. The best? Perhaps not, but it makes that Dragon Age 360 port look like GARBAGE.
My PC can run all of Crysis (except the last boss) at a steady clip of 25-30 FPS (at HQ with 2XAA at 1680*1050). I have to turn settings down to get the same thing in Farcry 2, and it was released 2 years later (and doesn't look nearly as good). thats pretty damn impressive.
Though I will remind you all that HL2 runs on an atom-netbook.
@The_Laughing_Man: Jeez, what do you have in there? I still need to overclock my 9600GT to get full settings (while admittedly that isn't the most epic card in the world, its still better than anything that was out in 2007).
" @The_Laughing_Man: Jeez, what do you have in there? I still need to overclock my 9600GT to get full settings (while admittedly that isn't the most epic card in the world, its still better than anything that was out in 2007). "
There isn't much aspects in ME2 that utilizes next gen tech. Their shadows and lighting for example is pretty standard tech. Bioware has never been a company focused on next generation tech. They're all about generating a huge amount of content and fully maximizing current generation tech. The Unreal engine can do alot more than what ME2 showed and I didn't see any signs of heavy modifications to the engine. I thought their level streaming wasn't good which resulted in long load times. And wasn't there a huge post about the low-res textures on most of the models? Their use of physics in the game is also pretty standard. Just good use of basic physics forces. So I guess it is technically impressive that it had the impact that it did while utilizing standard tech. But ME2 definitely did not utilize any cutting edge graphical or physics tech. It just had good production values.
" @TwoOneFive: Care to elaborate on that? Keep in mind that PC games are displayed in much higher resolution, with the option for AA. "
higher resolution, higher framerates, AA etc doesn't equal most technically impressive. There is no where near the attention to unique, atmospherical kind of detail in crysis like there is in Uncharted 2. Crysis just has very real looking hd open world. uncharted two has amazing amount of animating going on, whether it is going on in the environment or the character models themselves, there is tons of context sensitive dialogue going on, action set pieces like the train sequence just are not existent in Crysis. There is absolutely NOTHING in Crysis that can compare to the complexity of the opening battle between Kratos and Gaia and Poseidon.
Argh.... for me Mass efffect has that weird Bioware facial emotion stuff which for me looks dead/ and always seems out of place, might as well have a text box saying "I'm Angry"
There is no argument on "technically impressive". That is a title that clearly belongs to Crysis (and soon to Crysis 2). Most artistically impressive...well that can be argued.
" Argh.... for me Mass efffect has that weird Bioware facial emotion stuff which for me looks dead/ and always seems out of place, might as well have a text box saying "I'm Angry" "
" @TwoOneFive: What you are describing is art direction, not technical stuff. Attention to detail != technical skill. "
no its not at all you jackass. with that logic you would think santa monica studios is nothing but a bunch of artists huh? i mean surely there isn't much technical stuff going on here:
do you realize how much complex programming had to be created just to get that stuff to work right?!?! you have no idea what you are talking about. the action the goes on in gow3 and uncharted 2 is way beyond anything that is happening in crysis. just because crysis has everything looking hd with great AA and all, doesn't mean its the most technically impressive.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along
with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely
increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.
Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other
Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll
send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment