TheNotoriousKDV's forum posts

#1 Posted by TheNotoriousKDV (8 posts) -

The story was much better in ME1 but the gameplay was much better in ME2. Hopefully ME3 will have superior gameplay and story compared to both ME1 and ME2.  
I think the thing about ME2 that I disliked the most was how the Alliance and Council are too far in the background. I would have liked to have seen more conversation between Shep and the Alliance/Council. ME is all about making choices but it seems like Bioware made the choice for us in this situation. Shep is working with Cerberus no matter what and the Alliance and Council(with the exception of Anderson) don't care much for Shep at all any more.  I mean I never get the impression that the Alliance and Council understand that Shep was dead for 2 years and that he was rezzed by Cerberus. Maybe it's just me but I get the impression that they think he never died and that was just a cover story for his defection to Cerberus. Or maybe they don't even care that he died. Regardless, it all led to the Alliance and Council playing no role whatsoever in ME2.
I would have liked the option of convincing the Alliance that my allegiance was still with them and that I was just being forced to work for Cerberus since they were the ones that brought me back to life. That way I could work both sides during ME2. I mean sure, you can tell TIM that you're done working with him at the end of ME2 if you want but that doesn't mean that the Alliance will take you back. But if the Alliance played a bigger role in ME2 then you could have convinced them through words and actions that your loyalty is still with them. Or even have the option of playing both sides and convincing both sides that your loyalty is with them. Instead of the Alliance and Cerberus using Shep, Shep uses both of them. That would have been nice. But somehow, someway, the Alliance should have had a role in ME2 instead of being irrelevant. 

#2 Posted by TheNotoriousKDV (8 posts) -

It wasn't the first gaming system that I owned but if memory serves me, the 2600 was my first gaming experience. My uncle had one of these until he upgraded to the 7200 and then an NES but this was the one that he had when I first got hooked on games. It was mostly Pacman and Pinball and Asteroids I think. I was too young to remember that well but that's what I do remember from that.

#3 Posted by TheNotoriousKDV (8 posts) -

When it comes to fighting games, the more characters the merrier. I always want as many playable characters as possible in my fighting games so please, NeatherRealm, try to put in as many characters from the Mortal Kombat universe as possible.

#4 Edited by TheNotoriousKDV (8 posts) -

I personally prefer ME2 to ME1 and I'm a big RPG fan. ME is really a shooter with RPG elements. Neither ME1 nor ME2 is a pure RPG. I think they tried too hard to make the first game more of an RPG than it needed to be. Spending points to train in weapons and increase your weapon damage, the inventory system, omni-gel, all the different levels of weapons, armor etc.(Lancer I, II, III etc.) were all things that I felt weren't really needed in that game. If it was a pure RPG then perhaps those things would be ok but it's not.  ME2 cleaned up all those things and I think created a much better game. It's all the good things about the original without all of the things that I disliked about the original. Some may think that it's dumbed down or too simplified but I think that it's exactly what ME should be. A shooter with some, but not too many RPG elements and not a heavy RPG type game.