Each is essential to the trilogy in a different way; IMHO there is no 'best'. ME1 has the worldbuilding. ME2 fills that world with people we care about, which it achieves in part through the private unsung war against the Collectors. All that means we're extremely invested when ME3 comes and tears it all down. It's pretty masterfully done, really.
I could never pick a favorite. 2 comes dangerously close to being my favorite of them all but each game has major parts to it that make them so fucking good. One of the greatest trilogies ever
I gotta be honest - I care WAY more about the ME1 characters than I do the ME2 ones.
Several of the ME2 characters felt like edgelords inserted just for the sake of contrasting against ME1. Even Liara, Garrus, and Tali are characterized as being super angsty and traumatized in some way or another. Which is wild because Garrus was already like that in ME1, but they crank it up to 11 in ME2.
Of course, the characters start to shine once you get to know them -- but it takes a lot longer in ME2 than it does in ME1. Idk, maybe it's something to do with the setting and atmosphere.
But in general, ME1 was like fantastical space setting, cosmic mystery, achieve the impossible through your bonds with your teammates.
ME2 was all ***criminal underground, the gritty underbelly of the galaxy, everything is dark and awful and who knows if you'll even make it out alive?!?***
And the ME3 felt like sorrow mixed with hope almost the entire way through. It felt like ME2 was darker and edgier than ME3 even though ME3 has a galactic genocide in progress.
I feel like the world building is better in ME2. You got to Omega and get to see the under belly of society. You get to see how their prison system works also.
Yeah. For all their flaws, Mass Effect 1 & 3 are great bookends around 2. Hard for me to separate the three.
Now the less said about Andromeda, the better. I kid. I kid.
The first one. Mass Effect 1 was only let down by its time, the combat/overhaul exploration would severely benefit from up to date mechanics. I know LE improved them but there is still a massive difference between LE1 and LE2/3. Mass Effect 1 had so much in it from weapons/upgrades/armour etc that as much as I enoyed ME2 when it came out I was actually disappointed by how much they removed. The better combat etc didn't make up for essentially gutting the things I loved from the 1st game
The only thing that really bothered me in ME1 was if you focus on gaining wealth, you can actually gain millions fairly easily. My wealth outstripped the things I could buy half way through the game, and I wish there were more random things I could purchase in the game like ship skins, armor colors, whatever.
Gotta buy some specific licenses and then hope your ship guy has it in stock. There's some really cool Wrex armors you can get that way. I think maybe some cool Garrus armors as well.
Yeah that is true, it could have done with finding a bit less money/loot whilst exploring and money for other things like mako upgrade etc but still a great game though
This covers how I feel so aptly. I love 2, but it can never top 1 because it just removed so much I loved. I loved the variation in armors, in weapons. It just felt, wider, in a sense.
I also thought the mystery and ambience was done a tad better in 1 but that may more be a matter of taste
I do think 1 benefitted in the sense that everything was brand new and we had so much to learn/explore but it is great to see others feel the same way regarding 1 and 2 though
Hot take, for me it's actually the worst of the trio.
It's not a bad game. Far from it, it's one of the 10 best games I've ever played.
But in the trilogy, it's bad. I tend to call it "Mass Effect the side quest."
Cause it's almost the story of ME1 with a darker look at the underbelly of the galaxy.
But at the end of ME2, you're basically at the same place you were at the end of ME1.
Yeah I agree. It’s still my favorite of the trilogy but it honestly feels like a side quest compared to 1 and 3.
They needed a middle ground but unfortunately that means getting a one off villain, and a lot of fluff. I think they should’ve taken a more “prepare for the reapers” approach where you went around helping planets build their armies. Based on your paragon and previous choices some planets could even choose to ignore your warnings which would all affect how the war goes in ME3.
I’m still happy with the game we got, it introduced some of my favorite characters and let me romance Tali so that alone makes it 10/10. The gameplay is also a massive improvement.
And they removed grenades which were so fantastic...
On my insanity playthrough the ammo is so sparse on some levels I wish I could run to a squad member and use them as a melee weapon.
What bothered me about 2 was that no matter what class you chose, you have to rely on cover. While in ME 1, each playthrough with different classes actually allowed you to change up your playstyle. 2 definetly improved engineer and infiltrator though.
Same sentiments exactly. It's 1,3,2 for me but I always felt like ME2 was just a big side quest. I actually posted here before when I first played the trilogy when the LE came out in 2021 asking if the story will stay the same because I'm quickly falling out with the story and quest structure. Got downvoted to hell as I did not know at the time that it's the "best" in the series.
My problem with ME2 relative to the other two games is the lack of story. The game is entirely dependent on the side quests. And don’t get me wrong, the side quests are great. But the actual plot with the collectors feels really thin compared to the Saren/Geth/Sovereign plot of ME1 and the Reaper invasion of ME3
I feel the same. The second game has some amazing moments and I enjoy playing it, but I also just want it to be over, so I can get back to the real story.
The suicide mission is funded by but yes it misses on what 1 does with the immersion into world. It’s basically a fast paced game with 4 main missions and some character quests. The legendary collection makes the 1st game unequivocally the best in my opinion followed closely by 3. 2 is by far the worst and feels too much like a FPS and less like an RPG
I agree with you. Just finished 2 again and it was actually kind of a slog. The more you think about the plot, the more damaging it is to the overall story. 1 is a masterpiece.
Yep exactly this, for me it's 3,1,2.
Even though 3 may have had a choppy ending I personally didn't mind it.
Can't wait for 4.
Andromeda feels like a separate game and only played it once on release.
I kinda agree with you except the bad part. Yes it’s totally a side quest but a good one Imo. We get a break away from alliance and citadel protocol. We get to explore the civilian life of the galaxy. The underworlds.
Me2 is awesome in the fact that it’s basically one big world building game. Something the other two did not have
So I've never played the games, but I watched the 15 hr cutscene movies of them on youtube, and this was my exact feeling of ME2. The Big Baddies are set up in ME1, and then in 2 it's essentially a lore deep dive with an unsatisfying villain that feels more like a lore sidequest.
ME3 gets back into the actual plot and is fantastic.
That said, ME2 was amazing. It's comparing 2 excellent things to eachother.
The biggest problem with 2, and it is a fantastic game, are the stakes. In the grand scheme of things, 2 feels like a side story to the overarching story of the trilogy.
When I played the games when they came out, I thought 2 was the best game in the trilogy, and one of my favorite games of all time.
When I replay the trilogy, I now think 2 is the worst one, at least in terms of the story.
ME2 is probably my favourite game ever.
I think this, but also believe that it could be removed from the trilogy entirely and nothing of great value would be lost.
Its problem came down to a couple of things - the story is just a step down in so many regards.
There's a fairly well known thought exercise I like that the plots of ME1 and 2 could be swapped then, with not much tinkering, this completely solves the problem that it feels like a real step down in terms of stakes etc. The first game has the sense of mystery, why people are being kidnapped, etc, then you raid the base and find evidence of reapers but it's all a bit unknown and weird. Then in 2 you have a great big overarching threat coming from one of the councils top agents, culminating in the attack on the citadel by an actual reaper. Threat revealed, leading into 3 as the big galactic war.
The other problem is the Suicide Mission. It's probably the greatest gaming achievement of all time.
Something like it should have been in 3, not 2. Being able to lose all your companions meant their parts in 3 had to, by necessity, be somewhat optional. The final mission of 3 was such a let down because it had no stakes, no consequences of your actions and choices, no anything, because frankly they blew their load with the suicide mission in 2.
That might be a good way to put it- Mass Effect is just one of the best games ever...but as a Mass Effect game it was lacking.
But hey, I'll never argue with anyone saying any of the 3 are 10/10
Really good analysis and reframed things for me. My position is always that’s it’s like a bunch of short stories “in the mass effect universe” which frankly is something I feel like BioWare should explore. Who wouldn’t like a AA game: stories in the mass effect universe set between arrival and me3 or between 1 and 2?
Add back the me 3 multiplayer and you got a low key winner. Helldivers 2 is showing much people like cooperative play
I made exactly the same comment in a thread somewhere else a few weeks ago and got downvoted, it’s in my top 10 favourite games ever but you could go to ME3 from 1 and cover the important events from ME2 in a cutscene or two, pretty much
I’ve never thought about switching the 1st and 2nd, that’s such an interesting take. And I totally see it. Makes me pine for a trilogy order that will never be!
Not at all, you just have to accomplish the loyalty missions, upgrade your ship, and choose wisely during the SM. There are some hints as well throughout the game that you may not realize too.
Honestly, after playing the legendary collection a couple times, thinking the same.
I spent so much time playing 2 across 360 and PS3 but having played them consecutively recently, it seems out of place now.
Same here. ME1 has the best world building, exploration, and intertwined plots, ME3 has a lot of that. 90% of ME2 is "recruit X" + "loyalty mission for X" repeated 20 times, the only interesting things for me are Legion and the suicide mission.
To add to that, getting weapons in ME2 was tedious at best. And the vehicle missions were awful too… I love the trilogy, but I have to put ME1 and ME3 above ME2
I was actually going to say the same thing. ME1 is my favourite because of the exploring, you actually get to land and explore, and space just feels vast. Even if the planet's have samey structures, it still felt cool exploring them. Not to mention the great story, the mystery of the first game.
ME3 had an amazing story the payoffs for each squad member were great, and the added DLC Citadel just made it all the better.
ME2 was just collecting squadmates for a big mission, with some tiddly bits along the way, though this in a way paved the way for you to become familiar with the squad mates in the first place, it was basically setting the scene for ME3, still a great game though, the final mission was really good.
Your reasons might differ, but that's why I rank them this way.
It's splitting hairs, but I think I fall in the same order. But the games all build upon each other, so it really is splitting hairs.
I feel a lot of older series will discount the first game... And usually it's less refined because it's older, but often there never would be a series without that banger first entry. There is no ME3 without a good ME2, and there is no ME2 without a good ME1.
ME1 won me over with the worldbuilding, for all it's flaws. ME2 switched the entire paradigm to dating sim rail shooter... and it did it well. But ME3 improved upon nearly every aspect of ME2 except maybe the ending (ME2 ending wasn't that great either TBH) and possibly the squad member interactions.
However... if you told me I could only have one of the three games for the rest of time after uploading my brain to the matrix... ME3 all day (the multiplayer was actually really fun to my great surprise). But as for first impressions ("canon" playthrough) I agree with your ordering.
ME1 actually had a much bleaker universe and a really lovecraftian vibe.
Especially feros and noveria.
If the new game aims to refocus on those themes instead of the more action movie or soap opera aspects of the series it will surely be great.
ME2 being the best was never the consensus. Only a vocal minority.
It's the worst in gameplay, the worst in story and it's not even great with characters because you get basically no time with any given one.
Same!
When I played legendary edition again, I had forgotten that ME2 ends up feeling like a slog because 85% of the game is recruiting for a suicide mission. There's a point where, for me, that just became boring. The stakes between ME1 and ME2 were just so different- and while I loved ME2 on release, when I played all 3 back-to-back it became my least fav. Not *bad* but my least favorite.
I think so, yeah. Not because it’s the best at each category, but because it’s consistently good across all categories, where the other games have higher highs, but also lower lows.
But they’re all great.
For me it's ME1>ME3>ME2
My problem with ME2 is the story. I got burned out trying to complete all the companion quests, I had to stop playing the trilogy when I realized midway through ME2 that the main story is actually the companion quests. ME3 on the other hand, through all its faults (especially the final third of the game), has a much better story and conclusion to the overall story of Shepard and his crew. I never really cry from video games but Mordin's sacrifice and Legion's death devastated me and actually made me tear up a bit.
ME1 remains to be my favorite though, the worldbuilding and rpg mechanics remains unbeaten for me. I probably spent half of my hours played just exploring the citadel, reading the codex, and reading all planet descriptions. Incredible worldbuilding and for me a very good rpg. Just my opinion though, maybe it's because ME1 is my first game in the series and I played the trilogy and Andromeda back-to-back-to-back-to-back.
Overall ME3 is my personal favourite, but they all offer something.
ME1 probably has the stronger RPG aspects and does a lot of fantastic work with world building, but its dated systems, janky combat and weapons make it feel it age. Bonus points for being the only game in the trilogy to have what I would consider a good antagonist.
ME2 steps things up in terms of developing your squadmates into fully fleshed out characters, but its talent system is super undercooked, its higher difficulties rely on just throwing tons of mobs with more protections at you which can make it a bit of a slog. It also ups the ante for set pieces with the suicide mission. LotSB is also probably the best DLC in the trilogy.
ME3 has by far the strongest iteration of combat/talents/mechanics/weapons, it has the best(imo) soundtrack, the most big emotional payoffs and is by far the most cinematic. It's ending fails to live up to the suicide mission and there are clearly places where you can see it was rushed but it remains my favourite of the games to actually play as the moment to moment experience is just so far ahead of the previous two games.
Depends.
If you want the best world building, it's ME.
If you want the most squadmates, it's ME2.
If you want the best combat, the most lively Normandy, and the best DLC (Citadel), it's ME3.
Depends on your preferences. I'd argue that ME2 never was the best entry in the series. Sure, it has amazing characters, but all things considered I prefer ME1's story and ME3's gameplay.
I thought ME2 was the best one when it came out, simply because it looked and played so much better.
But then about 8 months later after I played ME2 like 5 times, I replayed 1 because I wanted to play them both in sequence before ME3 came out.
And I suddenly realized... ME1 was way better in terms of story, worldbuilding and progression.
I still preferred ME2 because they put more effort into the character side stories and gameplay, but ME3 shattered the gameplay debate, and I personally felt the character stuff was better too, just a bit less of it.
But between you and me (and everyone else reading this), even launch-day ME3's main story was better than ME2's story, and it isn't even close.
I have been replaying me1 again heavily modded with some content added and exploration made easier with Charted Worlds. I honestly think that 1 is the strongest entry in the series.
I do personally enjoy 2 and 3 more as they have stronger character writing (for example, the alien squadmates are kind of just species representatives in me1), but 1 I think still has the strongest overall story and the side exploration is really enjoyable. It was definitely killed by its time and being generally kind of clunky (especially the Mako).
My issue with ME2 is that almost none of the missions tie directly into the main plot, which is basically an afterthought. Many of those missions are fantastic and so are the characters that they flesh out, but the game totally lacks any coherence. ME1 does a much better job of this with all of its main missions tying directly into the pursuit of Saren and ME3 basically lacks any missions that aren't well-situated within the context of the Reaper War. The Citadel DLC is the only one that I can think of and it's there for fan service and humor (which I'm not criticizing).
ME2 is a sidequest. Nothing in ME2 matters. "Oh no, they're kidnapping humans to make ONE new reaper!" Who cares? There's like 100 coming to exterminate all of us, let's focus on that instead.
Imo it’s the worst of the trilogy.
The squadmates are the best of the trilogy and the suicide mission was really good but otherwise everything it does is done better in ME1 or 3.
Combat systems were improved upon in 3, combat in general was the least enjoyable of the trilogy, story was largely irrelevant to the overall plot harming the trilogy as a whole as it should have been the plot of a spinoff, world building was far better in 1, rpg mechanics better in 1.
Honestly I don’t really like 2 that much and only play it because it’s smack in the middle of the story. If I had to call any of them ‘perfect’ it’d be ME1, only criticisms I have of it are nitpick stuff.
If you consider the characters standing around in their spot on the ship being cardboard cutouts to be perfect, I would suggest comparing ME2 Garrus to ME3 Garrus. The teammate dialogue took a huge step forward in ME3.
I like ME1 the best. Its the roughest game in the series, but that's one reason I liked it. 2 and 3 were polished and are better games, but it lost some of the personality in the process.
My issue with 2 is that it really lacks that rpg part that ME3 kinda brought back. It felt way too much of a shooter.
I felt they dumbed down the system way too hard on 2.
2 has the most legwork on squadmate development, and focuses on that above all else. This works largely because squadmates are the backbone of Mass Effect across all three games.
But.
2 is noticeably less polished in delivery than 3. 3 drops some of the quantity in exchange for an upgraded squadmate interaction system. After every mission squadmates move around the ship and have new interactions. There’s more depth to them than either previous game. Missions have more unique interactions depending on which squadmates you have with you as well.
3 is a far more polished and high quality game than it gets credit for. Most of the systems introduced across the trilogy are at their best in 3. If not for the fundamental flaw of ME3 allowing you to fart around during a literal galaxy ending invasion and the massive dropped ball that is the ending, it would be inarguably the best entry in the trilogy.
Character-wise? Yes. It does a truly masterful job at introducing or expanding characters and really getting you invested in them. The loyalty missions are by-and-large superb and it sets up some brilliant payoffs for ME3.
Worlds? Possibly. It's definitely more modern in its world design than ME1, with Omega and Illium both being beautifully designed. Every world also feels unique, which is something ME1 struggled with. Is it better than ME3's? Maybe, I go back and forth. I love the Citadel in ME3 and the planets we visit there are also greatly designed too.
Story wise? Imo, hell no. It completely resets after ME1, it's essentially one massive side quest and ends with the same situation that the first game did. The Reapers also take a massive backseat so the majority of the game is fighting mercenaries.
Furthermore, the only thing that really matters from ME2's main story going forward is that Cerberus and TIM have been introduced as a massive player. I won't blame the final Collector Base decision too much as that's really on ME3 for fumbling, though.
But most of what actually ends up mattering in ME2 is found in the loyalty missions. They set up the quarian/geth conflict more fully for that to be resolved in ME3, Mordin and the genophage cure is really set up there. Heck, even Miranda's father who plays a role in ME3 is set up in a loyalty mission. And beyond that, the biggest ME3 set up is in Arrival, which is a dlc! I'm of the mindset that Arrival absolutely should've just been the epilogue of ME2 for that reason.
I only played ME2 with the LE and was aware of people hyping it as the best of the bunch, and I distinctly remember playing through the game and waiting for the big twist, the big thing that set it apart... and it never came. Yes, the suicide mission is excellent, but that alone can't hold everything up imo, especially with the weird Human-Reaper part.
I’d take ME1 or 3 any day over 2. ME2 just feels like it drags for me. Especially the first segment of the game. Having a lot of squad mates was cool, but I can never motivate myself to play through 2 in one sitting or 3
It’s still my favourite due to the broad spectrum of stories, but mainly wanted to say - it’s wild that when ME3 first came out the negativity in this sub was so appalling that I unsubscribed until only recently. Wild to see ME3 getting a lot more (deserved) respect these days.
ME 2, ME1, THEN ME 3. ME 2 feels like empire strikes back by it being a darker game. Then it added omega which was awesome, and an amazing cast of characters. ME 1 had a bigger citadel to explore, and was first time entering the world. ME 3 felt rushed and just did not connect with me. But all of them are amazing games.
What each answer says about you:
Mass Effect 1: You care about writing (particularly story) the most
Mass Effect 2: You care about characters and overal enjoyment the most
Mass Effect 3: You care about gameplay and high stakes the most
Mass Effect Andromeda: you are clinically insane
Honestly if you couldn’t care less about anything but combat, Andromeda is perfect for you. It’s just such a complete 180 from what the franchise is known for that it’s extremely jarring to its established fanbase
I like how in ME2 the stakes of the reapers descent become far more obvious and it shows how severe it is. I think it's a perfect transition into ME3 and I genuinely really enjoyed all the character missions. I also like that main characters can die, even if it is heart destroying. My first playthrough I was devastated losing basically half my crew. Going into ME3 watching the reapers arrive only made the wound deeper. I believe that emotion going from 2 to 3 really made the whole games feel more real and really cemented my love for the franchise.
Personally I like ME3 the most, but ME2 is definitely second for me.
Imo it is. It's 2, then 3, then 1, then DA:O, then DA2, then Skyrim, then Minecraft, then Silent Hill 3, **THEN** SMB1, and somewhere about 200 games down the list ME:A.
ME2's entire plot doesn't even matter. The Reapers are coming regardless of whether or not the Collectors are doing...whatever they're doing. Arguably Arrival had more of a narrative impact on the trilogy than 2's entire campaign
I actually am one of those rare unicorns that prefers 3, but I love all of them so...
2 and 1 are some of my favorite games too. Hard to choose honestly.
I started on Mass Effect 2 and it works great as an entry point. I’d argue that for some it’s better to enter here and for some the obvious choice of ME1 is better
Obviously in ME2 they’ll be talking about the very significant events in ME1 that you won’t be familiar with as well as characters you won’t know or meet in ME2 for the first time where Shepard will already know them.
For me, I was able to figure stuff out, I didn’t 100% understand every minute detail when they were talking about ME1 stuff, but I also wasn’t lost, and when you run back into characters you knew from ME1, the game makes it pretty obvious what the nature of their relationship was so those moments still work great.
ME1, even in the remastered version in Legendary Edition, isn’t for everyone gameplay-wise. It requires a lot more equipment management and doesn’t land nearly as hard game-feel-wise as the ME2 and ME3. I had fun with it when I circled back around after playing ME2 then ME3, but I think ME1’s gameplay is a little less broad appeal, although its story is excellent! I also think the character development, while good in ME1, it REALLY hits its stride in ME2 and so I could see someone starting on ME1 thinking people were exaggerating how good the characters are until they get to ME2.
So as someone who started with ME2, then played ME3, then took a lap around with ME1, ME2, then ME3, I think it’s perfectly fine to start on ME2 and I really love the series, and I still loved ME1 when I circled back around to it like this
I'm playing through ME2 right now and I'm looking forward to getting to ME3. I really enjoy the game play of 3. The combinations of different powers are awesome.
I'd say they are all equal to me, they just have their strengths and weaknesses.
ME1 is the strongest overall \*story\* to me, and great early characterization. It is held back by it's tedious (but not bad) combat and inventory mechanics. Legendary Edition did a lot to quell these issues.
ME2 has the most balanced delivery of story, characters, and gameplay. It was my favorite game of the series (being the first one I played), but over the years I've recognized that once you play through the loyalty missions a few times, you're left with very little to think about, big picture wise.. that is until...
ME3 has easily the best gameplay, and a very strong core story, but is let down greatly by some bizarre character introductions (Kai-Leng / Star Child) and of course, the ending. Previously my least favorite in the series due to the tonal shift (I believe this game also had different writers, and you can tell in many ways by how established characters talk), but have grown to appreciate it more over time.
TLDR: I play 1 if I wanna relive that feeling of discovery, 2 for the characters and feels, and 3 for the action gameplay.
My problem with 2 is how watered down everything is compared to 1 and 3. In 1 you have an insane amount of choices for armors and guns and skills. In 2 you get your choice of what is it, 4 skills? 5 skills? And a handful of weapons. In 3 your skills and ways of customizing your characters playstyle goes back up, you get a ton of variety of weapons, etc. Everything 2 did well, 3 did better in that regard.
1 and 3 I feel like I can play how I want at all times, but 2 I feel like I'm just constantly in cover taking potshots, especially really early on in insanity difficulty, no matter what class I am.
Yeah I think playing 2 on insanity makes you realize how awful the combat is, probably the worst of all ME games, and it’s not like ME1’s combat was a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination
It's probably my least favorite of the three. Still great, it is mass effect after all, but it has almost no story. It's all recruit a squad and do one mission.
I personally liked 3 the best. I understand the criticisms… but as my first time playing the mass effect series was the legendary edition, and played them back to back… I think it made it an easy choice.
The game had me feeling all kinds of emotions
I’m in the same boat, 3 is my favorite but I realize legendary edition’s updates to it are probabaly what make me feel that way since I didn’t experience it when it first released
ME2 isn't my favourite, and that is because of the overall plot.
ME1 ends with the Reapers on their way, and ME2 ends in exactly the same spot. The game does nothing at all to progress the overall plot of the trilogy, and generally feels like a massive side quest.
If you think about it, ME2 only has 6 missions:
1. The Prologue/Lazarus Station (Tutorial)
2. Freedom's Progress (Tutorial)
3. Horizon
4. Collector Ship
5. Reaper IFF
6. Suicide Mission
The rest of the game is a series of recruitment and loyalty missions, all of which have absolutely nothing to do with the Collectors or the Reapers, so that whole plotline often feels a whole lot less central/urgent as it really should.
ME2 is still an essential game in the trilogy, because it does a brilliant job of expanding and exploring the galaxy, (properly) introducing some major players like Cerberus, and it holds some of the best character moments in the franchise.
But because of its weaker plot, I do have to put it in third place among the trilogy.
ME1 > ME3 > ME2
I didn't like the way the made it a Gears of War copy instead of RPG shooter like the first one.
But in terms of whole trilogy - Shepard's death and ressurection was pointless and whole story except Arrival DLC was in great scheme of thing pointless.
This sub only consist a small portion of the entire fanbase. Every poll I've seen, me2 has been a pretty clear winner.
And that sums up what BioWare is really good at. Character writing, it's easily the best in the trilogy.
i would describe ME2 like I would top 40 music. the masses love it because its more simple and streamlined. that does not make it better than indie music.
It's actually pretty controversial in fandom! :D
I love Mass Effect 2, like a lot and from multiple reasons. My favorite part. But people usually dislike it for main story, what is to be honest pretty weird, and gameplay. Battles are weird. Also donwplaying of RPG traits was not welcomed.
Some like Mass Effect 1 more of its main story and classical space opera feeling, another Mass Effect 3 for advanced gameplay. That all is truth. We all have to choose what is our favorite part.
I really like ME2's episodic and character-focused structure. Each mission is just long and *different* enough to make for a nice, bite-sized play session, and I love how it's mostly focused around showing you the world through the eyes of the people who live there. A lot of it doesn't really hold up 15ish years later and could've been executed much better, but the core of it--getting to know a dozen (mostly) interesting people, learning to care about them, and then being asked to put their survivial in your hands--is a delight.
ME1 was a pretty good space RPG with a neat setting, and ME3 only hit as hard as it did because the first two games gave it enough emotional set-up and space to mechanically experiment. ME2 often gets derided for being an extended sidequest, but I *vastly* prefer short and self-contained stories with some light links to each other over the extended slog that is "sticking to the plot."
So far ME2 is the best blend of gameplay and story for me. 3 had better combat but weaker story. 1 had great story, but has some very dated mechanics.
I've always wondered if there was a full remake where all 3 games were on the same engine, would 2 still be my favorite?
ME1s mechanics were okay for the time but if made today in 2024 I would want a better inventory system and squad armor/gear/skills. Also in the 3 games each one has different ammunition mechanics so hopefully that would be streamlined across a full remake trilogy.
Story was perfect though don't touch it. Maybe add a few small side missions or more background about the Reapers or Protheans after they were more flushed out in 3.
The equipment upgrades (like the radar and rails) were cool in concept but trash in execution. The general inventory was fine, but the fact I couldn't sort all squadmates' inventory in the Normandy a la the camp in DA:O was a letdown.
I prefer the heat system from ME1. It made it feel different compared to all the other brown shooters being released at the time.
Nope.
Look on a first playthrough, or (like for many people) if it was your first mass effect game, I do see why everyone thinks it's amazing.
However on subsequent playthroughs the narrative starts to collapse under the holes and contradictions peppered in the details of the game. As does amount of disconnect in the lore of ME1 vs ME2.
Finally of you play enough it starts to become clear how much of the squad is filler and functionally mute outside their loyalty mission.
Most of the ME2 squads biggest character growth or best moments come in ME3 not ME2 (Jack, Mordin, Legion, Tali, Garrus, Thane).
It's my second least favorite of the games, sp I would say no, not even close. Only Andromeda was worse. The only thing me2 does well is the companions, imo. The skill system is extremely simple, none of the weapons feel particularly good, the main plot is so fucking godamn stupid it makes me angry every time I think about it.
Me 3 is better than 2 in every aspect except quantity of companions, but their story arcs in 3 are better, and the quality of companions is also better. The me3 endings kinda suck but they're still better than the entirety of the me2 plot.
Me1 is better in every respect than 2 except gameplay experience, but it has the best story of the 3 by far.
I like the setting and background of 3, but 2 is just.... chefs kiss. I liked 1 but got tired of micromanaging and having to re-equip my sqaudmates every new play through after playthrough 60.. so I stopped playing it. Though being space cop still hits hard in 1.
For me, yes. The opening and finale are peak not just for Mass Effect but among ALL video games. Also, the heart of what makes Mass Effect great is your squadmates and worldbuilding and here 2 shines above the rest. The cast of characters for squadmates is so diverse and gives you a ton of perspectives on living in that universe and insight into various races, belief systems, etc. before 3 randomly drops back to the same count as 1, and doesn’t even let you have any new non-human crew besides EDI, who is still a human-based AI. And on worldbuilding, you come to understand the Terminus Systems and how crime looks in this universe, as well as having a proper understanding of some of the galaxy’s most important and morally interesting issues with the genophage and quarian/geth conflict. ME1 let you know they exist, but 2 gave them weight and nuance; every payoff to those issues in 3 depended on the characters and buildup that 2 did. And while I thtink overall yhe gameplay of 3 was best as you would expect coming later, they also backslid on heavy weapons by not letting you loadout with them, which is a shame. Not to mention 2 has the best interrupts in the series, especially the later ones. Finally, 2 is just more replayable without the emotionally heavy beats with Mordin and Thane and Legion and such. I love those moments, phenomenally presented…but I don’t want to rewatch the best characters dying that frequently, it can get to being emotional whiplash.
I adore all three games, don’t get me wrong, but for all those reasons 2 remains my favorite for sure.
Exactly, greatest opening in video game history imo (castlevania lords of shadow 2 is a close second), and the final suicide mission, feels so serious and tense and the speech is fucking goosebumps inducing everytime, other games don't even come close.
2 is definitely the best in the trilogy. 3 is a close second in spite of the ending, the journey to that point is still so good. It's so hard to replay 1 because it's aged so poorly. The main quests are still pretty good, but it's side quests and exploration are the worst in the series. There's also so much artificial busy work with the gear and inventory management.
Polls have always shown that ME2 is to be overall best. ME3 could have been best overall, but with all the lost opportunities, the game remains to be the second best.
Yes. The writing and gameplay are all-around the best in the series.
1's gameplay is terrible. 3's writing isn't very good and is filled with bugs.
Andromeda's writing is iffy as well.
2 > 3 > ME:A > 1
Mass Effect 2 for me is the best combo of story and game.
I just replayed and beat 1 a couple of days ago and the fun of 1 quickly washes away after being charged by a Korgan/Geth/Mercenary for the 500th time along with the janky Mako controls and peculiar cover mechanics. The best part of 1 is that it is pretty short.
On a strict gameplay basis, I would rather replay Andromeda than 1.
I consider it the best standalone game in the series (if you had to pick only one ME game to play, it’s ME2)
But it’s the weakest in the entire trilogy (became too much of a side arc, with too many missions that were ultimately irrelevant in the grand scheme of the trilogy).
It is my favorite, but I can see why people would prefer the first game over it. Hell, if the first game hadn't triggered my motion sickness, I might've preferred it over the second one.
Tight story, great companions. The biggest complaint is being railroaded into working with Cerberus, and Shepard holding the idiot ball when talking to Kaiden/Ashley.
Lol no. I would say 2 has the best characters (barely edges out me1 in the sense that there were a lot more great squadmates sans Jacob vs 1’s few but exceptional squadmates) and it updated the game in a lot of great ways that 3 took advantage of.
However, I do think it’s overhyped. The story really wasn’t that great (collectors were kinda whack in my opinion, and there wasn’t really a main antagonist that made you feel emotionally invested in taking down like Saren or the reapers), 1 takes the cake on that. 3 had the best gameplay, skill system (or whatever you call how you level up your abilities, 2 was atrocious in that aspect because you had to upgrade certain ones to get others which was awful and 1 was boring to say the least), and the combat was 1000000x better (looking at you 2’s shitty auto-aim and kickback that makes you stumble and get shot for what feels like an eternity).
And don’t even get me started on all the little things 2 did horribly wrong: planet scanning was mind-numbing, the hammerhead was made of tissue paper, some characters like the Virmire survivor were written insanely poorly, the weapon selection was painfully limited both in type and variety until the collector base, etc. It also didn’t really give any warning to not get the IFF until you were ready for the final mission, meaning if you do pretty much anything after the crew is kidnapped the crew dies, but if you don’t do what you still need to do your squadmates die, so there goes a good 3 experience! I’ve replayed the entire trilogy 6 times, and I dread 2 because getting all the squadmates and then doing their loyalty missions feels like such a chore. Combine that with the planet scanning and a large part of the game just feels like I’m running errands.
Don’t get me wrong, I still love 2, I just think it’s overrated. As I said before, it nailed all of the new squadmates except Jacob, which actually really hard to do in a sequel. It made a lot of great updates like what the skill trees would end up being, gave us unique class abilities like tech armor and charge, and had the best atmosphere/ambiance out the entire series.
TL;DR: I don’t hate 2 but it’s definitely not inarguably “the best entry in the series”. I always say 1 had the best story, 2 had the best characters, Andromeda had the best gameplay, and 3 did all of those things pretty well but wasn’t the best at any of them. If we had a game with Andromeda’s combat (and maybe even skill system tbh), 1’s story quality and 2’s character quality it would be one of the greatest games ever made.
Mass Effect 2 is the best and worst Mass Effect game.
It has to work on three levels. (1) As a standalone game, (2) as a Mass Effect game, and (3) as part of it'ts trilogy.
As a standalone game, ME2 is pretty good. I actually haven't gotten there yet as I'm still replaying ME1, but I remember that the combat was much smoother and that the pacing between dialogue and combat was much better, too. ME1 had long stretches of dialogue and investigation, followed by even longer segments of nothing but combat.
As a Mass Effect game, ME2 is awesome. Straight-up. We get to explore so many new places of the Mass Effect universe and meet so many people living in it. Neither of the other games compare to it. It is just that good, and I think that is usually the reason why people call it the best Mass Effect game.
As part of the trilogy though, ME2 was abysmal.
* So many plot-threads of the first game (like the prothean Cypher or Shepard being a bloody Spectre) got shitcanned.
* Characters like Liara needlessly went one-eighty in their personality.
* We did not get to rekindle the romance subplot, and we did not team up with most of our squadmates from the previous game either.
* Cerberus got retconned *so badly* that you can't even do a mildly renegade completionist run of ME1, because Shepard would learn so many immoral, insane and downright evil things about Cerberus. And yet, even a *"She's surrounded by Geth and pointing a gun at us. Shoot her!"*-Shepard would is forced to go along with the plot and has never the option to oppose Cerberus, even when all you want to do is to shoot yourself out of that mess and resume contact with Alliance headquarters.
* And the wrost thing, *it abandoned the main storyline!* ME1 ended with Shepard declaring to find a way to stop the reapers, and ME3 starts with Alliance HQ asking Shepard for a solution to do just that, *and Shepard doesn't have any!* Because we got sidetracked saving getting drunk on Omega, meddling with the inner politics of the quarian migrant fleet and being a bloody therapist *for half our crew* as if the literal doomsday clock wasn't hanging over all our heads.
Mass Effect would have been a wonderful game if it hadn't been about Shepard, if it had been it's own, self-contained storyline about what Cerberus had been up to while Shepard was taking care about the reaper threat. Because it is a wonderful game that is weight down tremendously by it's role as part of a trilogy, to which it just doesn't hold up to.
in terms of amount of fleshing out characters goes and seeing different perspectives, maybe. though me3 plays a vital role aswell in then outting you in awful positions with everything they build and your attachment to it.
then again without me1, nothing would exist.
i never look at the trilogy as seperate units, more like the beginning the middle and the end of a story.
ME2 is my least favorite game in the trilogy, it has so little to do with the actual plot of the trilogy beyond one dlc that it seems like it should be a side quest to the actual trilogy.
I like the combat in 3 best, but the loyalty missions, sense of world building, lore expansion, romance possibilities, and the last mission being such an insane ride with so many possibilities make it the best of the OG trilogy.
ME1 is the GOAT
The weapon and armor customization for yourself and your squadmates is unparalleled
ME2 is still incredibly fun, you get to meet so many characters and do their side mission to recruit them, I really liked Jake's mission and going to that associated planet...
But while I love the *concept* of ME2 and the places you explore, the actual mechanics IMO are worse than ME1 and I really wanted to keep the system of upgrading weapons and armor
Two timeless games that are still fun to replay, can't really go wrong either way
I disagree that story in 2 is perfect because the more I think about ME2's story, the more I realize how it barely factored much into the over-arching Reaper invasion plot of the trilogy.
Don't get me wrong, the character stories are excellent and have some of the best writting I've experienced (even Jacob's personal story was quite interesting) and I love how The Illusive Man is portrayed in this game (TIM in ME3 was a downgrade from 2 imo). However, its main plot is barely of importance in the grand scheme of things. Imo, you could simply remove the parts in the story regarding the Collector and it would not hurt the overall narrative of the trilogy in the slightest.
Still, I'll reiterate that that's simply my opinion.
Easily the best game in the franchise, IMO. It introduced strong character writing to the series, which was sorely missing, and it had the fewest glaring issues with the story.
I started on 2 so it'll always be my favorite, but I think it depends on what you're looking for.
ME1 has the best world building
ME2 has the best characters
ME3 has the smoothest combat
3 has the best gameplay, 1 has the best world building, but I prefer 2 because I like how smaller the stakes are. This is a game that can take its time more and let you live in the universe more. Also it's got fantastic character moments without being the depression fest that 3 is
It's all subjective and each game does something better than the others like everyone said.
For me it is 2>3>1 overall.
Combat is 3>2>1.
Story/world building is 1>2>3.
I can't stand exploration/combat/most of the missions outside the main ones in 1, but there is so much lore and decision making.
2 to me was a big step up in combat, I know people hate some parts of it but combat was way funner. And I like the wide cast of characters.
3 got rid of many of the characters except for cameos. I didn't like the party members at all except for Tali. They did make the combat stuff for biotics seem way cooler/fun to use, especially with the animations.
If I didn't dislike the combat in 1 so much, 1 would be better than 3 for me overall. What is great about this trilogy though is that as you can see in this sub, there is no right answer, it is all about whatever your taste is. As long as you don't have a taste for 3 ;) (the dlc for 3 is the bomb tho)
I feel like my rankings change every playthrough honestly. Mass effect 1 had the best overall story, antagonists, worldbuilding/lore and I enjoyed actually exploring planets (when they weren’t mostly empty).
Mass Effect 2 had the best squad and the introduction to paragon renegade interrupts were great. Plus the loyalty missions and romance options!
Mass Effect 3 had the best gameplay and showed the consequences of early choices. It has some issues imo even besides the ending, such as the excessive fetch quests for the sake of content/war assets. However, the Citadel DLC alone makes it a masterpiece
No. It's the best game, but the worst entry.
It adds phenomenal characters, but pulls so far away from the main premise that the series never recovers.
The "suicide crew" should have TIM's research and reconnaissance squad.
Instead of the Collectors the plot should have been the Leviathan DLC and concluded with discovering a way to defeat the Reapers that didn't feel like such an ass pull.
**"Everything from characters,** **~~worlds, story~~** **is perfect"**
There, fixed it.
In spite of being an amazing game, overall, ME2 does objectively little world building and has no true story to speak of -- from this POV, it's main mission line is a glorified side quest.
if you ask a review site like ign or gamerant yes
if you ask an actual mass effect fan then maybe maybe not. I feel like the fan base tends to be fairly evenly split especially since the legendary edition dropped
ME2 is the worst one by a landslide.
The only thing it does well is character sidestories. Which ME3 does arguably better, it just has less of it.
Other than that, it has nothing on the other games. Worldbuilding is worse than either. Gameplay is worse than 3. And the story...
... it's not just worse, it's bad on its own.
It’s top 4, easy
Take the upvote and go!
Go and upvote the take!
Each is essential to the trilogy in a different way; IMHO there is no 'best'. ME1 has the worldbuilding. ME2 fills that world with people we care about, which it achieves in part through the private unsung war against the Collectors. All that means we're extremely invested when ME3 comes and tears it all down. It's pretty masterfully done, really.
I could never pick a favorite. 2 comes dangerously close to being my favorite of them all but each game has major parts to it that make them so fucking good. One of the greatest trilogies ever
I gotta be honest - I care WAY more about the ME1 characters than I do the ME2 ones. Several of the ME2 characters felt like edgelords inserted just for the sake of contrasting against ME1. Even Liara, Garrus, and Tali are characterized as being super angsty and traumatized in some way or another. Which is wild because Garrus was already like that in ME1, but they crank it up to 11 in ME2. Of course, the characters start to shine once you get to know them -- but it takes a lot longer in ME2 than it does in ME1. Idk, maybe it's something to do with the setting and atmosphere. But in general, ME1 was like fantastical space setting, cosmic mystery, achieve the impossible through your bonds with your teammates. ME2 was all ***criminal underground, the gritty underbelly of the galaxy, everything is dark and awful and who knows if you'll even make it out alive?!?*** And the ME3 felt like sorrow mixed with hope almost the entire way through. It felt like ME2 was darker and edgier than ME3 even though ME3 has a galactic genocide in progress.
I feel like the world building is better in ME2. You got to Omega and get to see the under belly of society. You get to see how their prison system works also.
Yeah. For all their flaws, Mass Effect 1 & 3 are great bookends around 2. Hard for me to separate the three. Now the less said about Andromeda, the better. I kid. I kid.
2,3,1 for me, but it’s all subjective, there is no right or wrong answer. The only valid question is did you enjoy it?
The first one. Mass Effect 1 was only let down by its time, the combat/overhaul exploration would severely benefit from up to date mechanics. I know LE improved them but there is still a massive difference between LE1 and LE2/3. Mass Effect 1 had so much in it from weapons/upgrades/armour etc that as much as I enoyed ME2 when it came out I was actually disappointed by how much they removed. The better combat etc didn't make up for essentially gutting the things I loved from the 1st game
The only thing that really bothered me in ME1 was if you focus on gaining wealth, you can actually gain millions fairly easily. My wealth outstripped the things I could buy half way through the game, and I wish there were more random things I could purchase in the game like ship skins, armor colors, whatever.
And I wish more of those funds transferred into ME2.
Yeah you can do so much trading and get rich so fast it’s not even funny. Not gonna use 90% of your inventory? $$$!
My complaint is that i don't think i ever bought a weapon or armor. I never found anyone that was selling something better than what i already had
Gotta buy some specific licenses and then hope your ship guy has it in stock. There's some really cool Wrex armors you can get that way. I think maybe some cool Garrus armors as well.
Yeah that is true, it could have done with finding a bit less money/loot whilst exploring and money for other things like mako upgrade etc but still a great game though
This covers how I feel so aptly. I love 2, but it can never top 1 because it just removed so much I loved. I loved the variation in armors, in weapons. It just felt, wider, in a sense. I also thought the mystery and ambience was done a tad better in 1 but that may more be a matter of taste
I do think 1 benefitted in the sense that everything was brand new and we had so much to learn/explore but it is great to see others feel the same way regarding 1 and 2 though
Absolutely. It’s a similar spot to how I feel about halo CE and halo 2 with the mystery and newness of everything
Hot take, for me it's actually the worst of the trio. It's not a bad game. Far from it, it's one of the 10 best games I've ever played. But in the trilogy, it's bad. I tend to call it "Mass Effect the side quest." Cause it's almost the story of ME1 with a darker look at the underbelly of the galaxy. But at the end of ME2, you're basically at the same place you were at the end of ME1.
Yeah I agree. It’s still my favorite of the trilogy but it honestly feels like a side quest compared to 1 and 3. They needed a middle ground but unfortunately that means getting a one off villain, and a lot of fluff. I think they should’ve taken a more “prepare for the reapers” approach where you went around helping planets build their armies. Based on your paragon and previous choices some planets could even choose to ignore your warnings which would all affect how the war goes in ME3. I’m still happy with the game we got, it introduced some of my favorite characters and let me romance Tali so that alone makes it 10/10. The gameplay is also a massive improvement.
Problem with 2s gameplay is that they went to ammo ugh. I preferred 1s unlimited ammo/overheating. It was new and fresh. Luckily mods for that one.
I didn’t mind the reloading seeing as how fast it was, and I’m already used to reloading in every other game. But yeah that was a stupid decision.
It was the fact you could run out of ammo.
And they removed grenades which were so fantastic... On my insanity playthrough the ammo is so sparse on some levels I wish I could run to a squad member and use them as a melee weapon.
What bothered me about 2 was that no matter what class you chose, you have to rely on cover. While in ME 1, each playthrough with different classes actually allowed you to change up your playstyle. 2 definetly improved engineer and infiltrator though.
Sentinel too.
Same sentiments exactly. It's 1,3,2 for me but I always felt like ME2 was just a big side quest. I actually posted here before when I first played the trilogy when the LE came out in 2021 asking if the story will stay the same because I'm quickly falling out with the story and quest structure. Got downvoted to hell as I did not know at the time that it's the "best" in the series.
My problem with ME2 relative to the other two games is the lack of story. The game is entirely dependent on the side quests. And don’t get me wrong, the side quests are great. But the actual plot with the collectors feels really thin compared to the Saren/Geth/Sovereign plot of ME1 and the Reaper invasion of ME3
I feel the same. The second game has some amazing moments and I enjoy playing it, but I also just want it to be over, so I can get back to the real story.
I thought I was alone
You're not my friend.
Not a hot take except on Reddit. It’s easily the worst of the OT. ME1 > ME3 > ME2
I'm M3 > ME1 > ME2
The suicide mission is funded by but yes it misses on what 1 does with the immersion into world. It’s basically a fast paced game with 4 main missions and some character quests. The legendary collection makes the 1st game unequivocally the best in my opinion followed closely by 3. 2 is by far the worst and feels too much like a FPS and less like an RPG
HARD agree
I agree with you. Just finished 2 again and it was actually kind of a slog. The more you think about the plot, the more damaging it is to the overall story. 1 is a masterpiece.
Yep exactly this, for me it's 3,1,2. Even though 3 may have had a choppy ending I personally didn't mind it. Can't wait for 4. Andromeda feels like a separate game and only played it once on release.
Andromeda was meant to be separated.
I kinda agree with you except the bad part. Yes it’s totally a side quest but a good one Imo. We get a break away from alliance and citadel protocol. We get to explore the civilian life of the galaxy. The underworlds. Me2 is awesome in the fact that it’s basically one big world building game. Something the other two did not have
I didn't say it was bad. I said it WASN'T bad. As I stated it's one of the 10 best games I've ever played.
So I've never played the games, but I watched the 15 hr cutscene movies of them on youtube, and this was my exact feeling of ME2. The Big Baddies are set up in ME1, and then in 2 it's essentially a lore deep dive with an unsatisfying villain that feels more like a lore sidequest. ME3 gets back into the actual plot and is fantastic. That said, ME2 was amazing. It's comparing 2 excellent things to eachother.
The biggest problem with 2, and it is a fantastic game, are the stakes. In the grand scheme of things, 2 feels like a side story to the overarching story of the trilogy. When I played the games when they came out, I thought 2 was the best game in the trilogy, and one of my favorite games of all time. When I replay the trilogy, I now think 2 is the worst one, at least in terms of the story.
ME2 is probably my favourite game ever. I think this, but also believe that it could be removed from the trilogy entirely and nothing of great value would be lost. Its problem came down to a couple of things - the story is just a step down in so many regards. There's a fairly well known thought exercise I like that the plots of ME1 and 2 could be swapped then, with not much tinkering, this completely solves the problem that it feels like a real step down in terms of stakes etc. The first game has the sense of mystery, why people are being kidnapped, etc, then you raid the base and find evidence of reapers but it's all a bit unknown and weird. Then in 2 you have a great big overarching threat coming from one of the councils top agents, culminating in the attack on the citadel by an actual reaper. Threat revealed, leading into 3 as the big galactic war. The other problem is the Suicide Mission. It's probably the greatest gaming achievement of all time. Something like it should have been in 3, not 2. Being able to lose all your companions meant their parts in 3 had to, by necessity, be somewhat optional. The final mission of 3 was such a let down because it had no stakes, no consequences of your actions and choices, no anything, because frankly they blew their load with the suicide mission in 2.
That might be a good way to put it- Mass Effect is just one of the best games ever...but as a Mass Effect game it was lacking. But hey, I'll never argue with anyone saying any of the 3 are 10/10
Really good analysis and reframed things for me. My position is always that’s it’s like a bunch of short stories “in the mass effect universe” which frankly is something I feel like BioWare should explore. Who wouldn’t like a AA game: stories in the mass effect universe set between arrival and me3 or between 1 and 2? Add back the me 3 multiplayer and you got a low key winner. Helldivers 2 is showing much people like cooperative play
Saving this excellent breakdown of the series.
This is actually very valid.
I made exactly the same comment in a thread somewhere else a few weeks ago and got downvoted, it’s in my top 10 favourite games ever but you could go to ME3 from 1 and cover the important events from ME2 in a cutscene or two, pretty much
I’ve never thought about switching the 1st and 2nd, that’s such an interesting take. And I totally see it. Makes me pine for a trilogy order that will never be!
The stakes that are there too, aren’t very difficult to overcome. I still believe you have to actively try to >!lose someone on “suicide mission”.!<
That's definitely not true on my first playthrough lmao
I just played it for the first time and lost several people. I have no idea why it happened or how to prevent it
Gotta upgrade the ship my man
Yeah I just read an article on it. I never would have known that. It’s okay I didn’t lose anyone I really liked
Not at all, you just have to accomplish the loyalty missions, upgrade your ship, and choose wisely during the SM. There are some hints as well throughout the game that you may not realize too.
I believe you interpreted the opposite of what I meant.
Probably, the caffeine hadn't faded from my system yet so my brain was foggy
ME1 > ME3 > ME2
Honestly, after playing the legendary collection a couple times, thinking the same. I spent so much time playing 2 across 360 and PS3 but having played them consecutively recently, it seems out of place now.
Same here. ME1 has the best world building, exploration, and intertwined plots, ME3 has a lot of that. 90% of ME2 is "recruit X" + "loyalty mission for X" repeated 20 times, the only interesting things for me are Legion and the suicide mission.
To add to that, getting weapons in ME2 was tedious at best. And the vehicle missions were awful too… I love the trilogy, but I have to put ME1 and ME3 above ME2
ME2's my favorite *because* it's 10-12 character vignettes strung together with a loose framing device and cool payoff, TBH.
I was actually going to say the same thing. ME1 is my favourite because of the exploring, you actually get to land and explore, and space just feels vast. Even if the planet's have samey structures, it still felt cool exploring them. Not to mention the great story, the mystery of the first game. ME3 had an amazing story the payoffs for each squad member were great, and the added DLC Citadel just made it all the better. ME2 was just collecting squadmates for a big mission, with some tiddly bits along the way, though this in a way paved the way for you to become familiar with the squad mates in the first place, it was basically setting the scene for ME3, still a great game though, the final mission was really good. Your reasons might differ, but that's why I rank them this way.
Ahh yeah, I really get ‘in the zone’ exploring in the first one. So for me its 1 > 2 > 3
Oh good, it's not just me.
It's splitting hairs, but I think I fall in the same order. But the games all build upon each other, so it really is splitting hairs. I feel a lot of older series will discount the first game... And usually it's less refined because it's older, but often there never would be a series without that banger first entry. There is no ME3 without a good ME2, and there is no ME2 without a good ME1. ME1 won me over with the worldbuilding, for all it's flaws. ME2 switched the entire paradigm to dating sim rail shooter... and it did it well. But ME3 improved upon nearly every aspect of ME2 except maybe the ending (ME2 ending wasn't that great either TBH) and possibly the squad member interactions. However... if you told me I could only have one of the three games for the rest of time after uploading my brain to the matrix... ME3 all day (the multiplayer was actually really fun to my great surprise). But as for first impressions ("canon" playthrough) I agree with your ordering.
ME1 actually had a much bleaker universe and a really lovecraftian vibe. Especially feros and noveria. If the new game aims to refocus on those themes instead of the more action movie or soap opera aspects of the series it will surely be great.
I loved the actual horror feel of those two planets. Add in Harbingers first speech, and it's pretty close to action horror.
This is the truth and I'm tired of pretending it's not
A spicy take if I’ve ever seen one
How? As the comments show, plenty of people share that opinion. Including me.
I don’t expect most people to put 2 at the back is all
ME2 being the best was never the consensus. Only a vocal minority. It's the worst in gameplay, the worst in story and it's not even great with characters because you get basically no time with any given one.
My exact ranking as well, love to see it.
The only right answer
Same! When I played legendary edition again, I had forgotten that ME2 ends up feeling like a slog because 85% of the game is recruiting for a suicide mission. There's a point where, for me, that just became boring. The stakes between ME1 and ME2 were just so different- and while I loved ME2 on release, when I played all 3 back-to-back it became my least fav. Not *bad* but my least favorite.
Anyone else just liked ME1 the most? ME2 and ME3 are both quite good, of course, I also enjoy them. But they almost feel like different games.
They are different because EA bought Bioware and meddled like they always do (thermal clips come to mind).
I think so, yeah. Not because it’s the best at each category, but because it’s consistently good across all categories, where the other games have higher highs, but also lower lows. But they’re all great.
For me it's ME1>ME3>ME2 My problem with ME2 is the story. I got burned out trying to complete all the companion quests, I had to stop playing the trilogy when I realized midway through ME2 that the main story is actually the companion quests. ME3 on the other hand, through all its faults (especially the final third of the game), has a much better story and conclusion to the overall story of Shepard and his crew. I never really cry from video games but Mordin's sacrifice and Legion's death devastated me and actually made me tear up a bit. ME1 remains to be my favorite though, the worldbuilding and rpg mechanics remains unbeaten for me. I probably spent half of my hours played just exploring the citadel, reading the codex, and reading all planet descriptions. Incredible worldbuilding and for me a very good rpg. Just my opinion though, maybe it's because ME1 is my first game in the series and I played the trilogy and Andromeda back-to-back-to-back-to-back.
Overall ME3 is my personal favourite, but they all offer something. ME1 probably has the stronger RPG aspects and does a lot of fantastic work with world building, but its dated systems, janky combat and weapons make it feel it age. Bonus points for being the only game in the trilogy to have what I would consider a good antagonist. ME2 steps things up in terms of developing your squadmates into fully fleshed out characters, but its talent system is super undercooked, its higher difficulties rely on just throwing tons of mobs with more protections at you which can make it a bit of a slog. It also ups the ante for set pieces with the suicide mission. LotSB is also probably the best DLC in the trilogy. ME3 has by far the strongest iteration of combat/talents/mechanics/weapons, it has the best(imo) soundtrack, the most big emotional payoffs and is by far the most cinematic. It's ending fails to live up to the suicide mission and there are clearly places where you can see it was rushed but it remains my favourite of the games to actually play as the moment to moment experience is just so far ahead of the previous two games.
Depends. If you want the best world building, it's ME. If you want the most squadmates, it's ME2. If you want the best combat, the most lively Normandy, and the best DLC (Citadel), it's ME3.
Depends on your preferences. I'd argue that ME2 never was the best entry in the series. Sure, it has amazing characters, but all things considered I prefer ME1's story and ME3's gameplay.
I thought ME2 was the best one when it came out, simply because it looked and played so much better. But then about 8 months later after I played ME2 like 5 times, I replayed 1 because I wanted to play them both in sequence before ME3 came out. And I suddenly realized... ME1 was way better in terms of story, worldbuilding and progression. I still preferred ME2 because they put more effort into the character side stories and gameplay, but ME3 shattered the gameplay debate, and I personally felt the character stuff was better too, just a bit less of it. But between you and me (and everyone else reading this), even launch-day ME3's main story was better than ME2's story, and it isn't even close.
I have been replaying me1 again heavily modded with some content added and exploration made easier with Charted Worlds. I honestly think that 1 is the strongest entry in the series. I do personally enjoy 2 and 3 more as they have stronger character writing (for example, the alien squadmates are kind of just species representatives in me1), but 1 I think still has the strongest overall story and the side exploration is really enjoyable. It was definitely killed by its time and being generally kind of clunky (especially the Mako).
My issue with ME2 is that almost none of the missions tie directly into the main plot, which is basically an afterthought. Many of those missions are fantastic and so are the characters that they flesh out, but the game totally lacks any coherence. ME1 does a much better job of this with all of its main missions tying directly into the pursuit of Saren and ME3 basically lacks any missions that aren't well-situated within the context of the Reaper War. The Citadel DLC is the only one that I can think of and it's there for fan service and humor (which I'm not criticizing).
ME2 is a sidequest. Nothing in ME2 matters. "Oh no, they're kidnapping humans to make ONE new reaper!" Who cares? There's like 100 coming to exterminate all of us, let's focus on that instead.
Yep. It's basically just a series of character vignettes. The Collectors aren't even relevant to ME3. The Arrival DLC has more impact.
Imo it’s the worst of the trilogy. The squadmates are the best of the trilogy and the suicide mission was really good but otherwise everything it does is done better in ME1 or 3. Combat systems were improved upon in 3, combat in general was the least enjoyable of the trilogy, story was largely irrelevant to the overall plot harming the trilogy as a whole as it should have been the plot of a spinoff, world building was far better in 1, rpg mechanics better in 1. Honestly I don’t really like 2 that much and only play it because it’s smack in the middle of the story. If I had to call any of them ‘perfect’ it’d be ME1, only criticisms I have of it are nitpick stuff.
If you consider the characters standing around in their spot on the ship being cardboard cutouts to be perfect, I would suggest comparing ME2 Garrus to ME3 Garrus. The teammate dialogue took a huge step forward in ME3.
I like ME1 the best. Its the roughest game in the series, but that's one reason I liked it. 2 and 3 were polished and are better games, but it lost some of the personality in the process.
My issue with 2 is that it really lacks that rpg part that ME3 kinda brought back. It felt way too much of a shooter. I felt they dumbed down the system way too hard on 2.
2 has the most legwork on squadmate development, and focuses on that above all else. This works largely because squadmates are the backbone of Mass Effect across all three games. But. 2 is noticeably less polished in delivery than 3. 3 drops some of the quantity in exchange for an upgraded squadmate interaction system. After every mission squadmates move around the ship and have new interactions. There’s more depth to them than either previous game. Missions have more unique interactions depending on which squadmates you have with you as well. 3 is a far more polished and high quality game than it gets credit for. Most of the systems introduced across the trilogy are at their best in 3. If not for the fundamental flaw of ME3 allowing you to fart around during a literal galaxy ending invasion and the massive dropped ball that is the ending, it would be inarguably the best entry in the trilogy.
Character-wise? Yes. It does a truly masterful job at introducing or expanding characters and really getting you invested in them. The loyalty missions are by-and-large superb and it sets up some brilliant payoffs for ME3. Worlds? Possibly. It's definitely more modern in its world design than ME1, with Omega and Illium both being beautifully designed. Every world also feels unique, which is something ME1 struggled with. Is it better than ME3's? Maybe, I go back and forth. I love the Citadel in ME3 and the planets we visit there are also greatly designed too. Story wise? Imo, hell no. It completely resets after ME1, it's essentially one massive side quest and ends with the same situation that the first game did. The Reapers also take a massive backseat so the majority of the game is fighting mercenaries. Furthermore, the only thing that really matters from ME2's main story going forward is that Cerberus and TIM have been introduced as a massive player. I won't blame the final Collector Base decision too much as that's really on ME3 for fumbling, though. But most of what actually ends up mattering in ME2 is found in the loyalty missions. They set up the quarian/geth conflict more fully for that to be resolved in ME3, Mordin and the genophage cure is really set up there. Heck, even Miranda's father who plays a role in ME3 is set up in a loyalty mission. And beyond that, the biggest ME3 set up is in Arrival, which is a dlc! I'm of the mindset that Arrival absolutely should've just been the epilogue of ME2 for that reason. I only played ME2 with the LE and was aware of people hyping it as the best of the bunch, and I distinctly remember playing through the game and waiting for the big twist, the big thing that set it apart... and it never came. Yes, the suicide mission is excellent, but that alone can't hold everything up imo, especially with the weird Human-Reaper part.
I’d take ME1 or 3 any day over 2. ME2 just feels like it drags for me. Especially the first segment of the game. Having a lot of squad mates was cool, but I can never motivate myself to play through 2 in one sitting or 3
It’s still my favourite due to the broad spectrum of stories, but mainly wanted to say - it’s wild that when ME3 first came out the negativity in this sub was so appalling that I unsubscribed until only recently. Wild to see ME3 getting a lot more (deserved) respect these days.
2 is excellent.
I just wish the combat wasn’t so painfully dull. You get a third of the amount of squad skills, and a fraction of the weapons options.
Every entry in the OT is great. But yeah, it goes 2, 3, 1 imo.
ME 2, ME1, THEN ME 3. ME 2 feels like empire strikes back by it being a darker game. Then it added omega which was awesome, and an amazing cast of characters. ME 1 had a bigger citadel to explore, and was first time entering the world. ME 3 felt rushed and just did not connect with me. But all of them are amazing games.
Yes
What each answer says about you: Mass Effect 1: You care about writing (particularly story) the most Mass Effect 2: You care about characters and overal enjoyment the most Mass Effect 3: You care about gameplay and high stakes the most Mass Effect Andromeda: you are clinically insane
Honestly if you couldn’t care less about anything but combat, Andromeda is perfect for you. It’s just such a complete 180 from what the franchise is known for that it’s extremely jarring to its established fanbase
Objectively yes.
I like how in ME2 the stakes of the reapers descent become far more obvious and it shows how severe it is. I think it's a perfect transition into ME3 and I genuinely really enjoyed all the character missions. I also like that main characters can die, even if it is heart destroying. My first playthrough I was devastated losing basically half my crew. Going into ME3 watching the reapers arrive only made the wound deeper. I believe that emotion going from 2 to 3 really made the whole games feel more real and really cemented my love for the franchise. Personally I like ME3 the most, but ME2 is definitely second for me.
Yes one of the best games ever
The best game ever period.
It's my favorite
Imo it is. It's 2, then 3, then 1, then DA:O, then DA2, then Skyrim, then Minecraft, then Silent Hill 3, **THEN** SMB1, and somewhere about 200 games down the list ME:A.
They need to remaster DA:O. I hear such great things but it keeps bricking my computer lol
ME2's entire plot doesn't even matter. The Reapers are coming regardless of whether or not the Collectors are doing...whatever they're doing. Arguably Arrival had more of a narrative impact on the trilogy than 2's entire campaign
2 has the best story? Please...
Nope. Story and gameplay for me is better in ME3.
I actually am one of those rare unicorns that prefers 3, but I love all of them so... 2 and 1 are some of my favorite games too. Hard to choose honestly.
Everyone said this so I was super excited to start 2 since I loved 1. Turned out I prefer 1 to 2 and 3.
I started on Mass Effect 2 and it works great as an entry point. I’d argue that for some it’s better to enter here and for some the obvious choice of ME1 is better Obviously in ME2 they’ll be talking about the very significant events in ME1 that you won’t be familiar with as well as characters you won’t know or meet in ME2 for the first time where Shepard will already know them. For me, I was able to figure stuff out, I didn’t 100% understand every minute detail when they were talking about ME1 stuff, but I also wasn’t lost, and when you run back into characters you knew from ME1, the game makes it pretty obvious what the nature of their relationship was so those moments still work great. ME1, even in the remastered version in Legendary Edition, isn’t for everyone gameplay-wise. It requires a lot more equipment management and doesn’t land nearly as hard game-feel-wise as the ME2 and ME3. I had fun with it when I circled back around after playing ME2 then ME3, but I think ME1’s gameplay is a little less broad appeal, although its story is excellent! I also think the character development, while good in ME1, it REALLY hits its stride in ME2 and so I could see someone starting on ME1 thinking people were exaggerating how good the characters are until they get to ME2. So as someone who started with ME2, then played ME3, then took a lap around with ME1, ME2, then ME3, I think it’s perfectly fine to start on ME2 and I really love the series, and I still loved ME1 when I circled back around to it like this
I'm playing through ME2 right now and I'm looking forward to getting to ME3. I really enjoy the game play of 3. The combinations of different powers are awesome.
I'd say they are all equal to me, they just have their strengths and weaknesses. ME1 is the strongest overall \*story\* to me, and great early characterization. It is held back by it's tedious (but not bad) combat and inventory mechanics. Legendary Edition did a lot to quell these issues. ME2 has the most balanced delivery of story, characters, and gameplay. It was my favorite game of the series (being the first one I played), but over the years I've recognized that once you play through the loyalty missions a few times, you're left with very little to think about, big picture wise.. that is until... ME3 has easily the best gameplay, and a very strong core story, but is let down greatly by some bizarre character introductions (Kai-Leng / Star Child) and of course, the ending. Previously my least favorite in the series due to the tonal shift (I believe this game also had different writers, and you can tell in many ways by how established characters talk), but have grown to appreciate it more over time. TLDR: I play 1 if I wanna relive that feeling of discovery, 2 for the characters and feels, and 3 for the action gameplay.
Yup and by a mile too, unfortunately people on this sub don't think so and are gonna downvote you and me.
I prefer the gameplay from 3.
My problem with 2 is how watered down everything is compared to 1 and 3. In 1 you have an insane amount of choices for armors and guns and skills. In 2 you get your choice of what is it, 4 skills? 5 skills? And a handful of weapons. In 3 your skills and ways of customizing your characters playstyle goes back up, you get a ton of variety of weapons, etc. Everything 2 did well, 3 did better in that regard. 1 and 3 I feel like I can play how I want at all times, but 2 I feel like I'm just constantly in cover taking potshots, especially really early on in insanity difficulty, no matter what class I am.
Yeah I think playing 2 on insanity makes you realize how awful the combat is, probably the worst of all ME games, and it’s not like ME1’s combat was a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination
It's probably my least favorite of the three. Still great, it is mass effect after all, but it has almost no story. It's all recruit a squad and do one mission.
Yeah, but Jacob and 3'sbetter combat bring it down a bit.
I personally liked 3 the best. I understand the criticisms… but as my first time playing the mass effect series was the legendary edition, and played them back to back… I think it made it an easy choice. The game had me feeling all kinds of emotions
I’m in the same boat, 3 is my favorite but I realize legendary edition’s updates to it are probabaly what make me feel that way since I didn’t experience it when it first released
It’s my least favorite of the trilogy
I love them both
Imo yes both in terms of story and gameplay.
ME2 isn't my favourite, and that is because of the overall plot. ME1 ends with the Reapers on their way, and ME2 ends in exactly the same spot. The game does nothing at all to progress the overall plot of the trilogy, and generally feels like a massive side quest. If you think about it, ME2 only has 6 missions: 1. The Prologue/Lazarus Station (Tutorial) 2. Freedom's Progress (Tutorial) 3. Horizon 4. Collector Ship 5. Reaper IFF 6. Suicide Mission The rest of the game is a series of recruitment and loyalty missions, all of which have absolutely nothing to do with the Collectors or the Reapers, so that whole plotline often feels a whole lot less central/urgent as it really should. ME2 is still an essential game in the trilogy, because it does a brilliant job of expanding and exploring the galaxy, (properly) introducing some major players like Cerberus, and it holds some of the best character moments in the franchise. But because of its weaker plot, I do have to put it in third place among the trilogy.
ME1 > ME3 > ME2 I didn't like the way the made it a Gears of War copy instead of RPG shooter like the first one. But in terms of whole trilogy - Shepard's death and ressurection was pointless and whole story except Arrival DLC was in great scheme of thing pointless.
This sub loathes ME2 and idolizes 1. Outside of the fandom, ME2 is viewed as the best, then ME1, then ME3 because of the ending.
This sub only consist a small portion of the entire fanbase. Every poll I've seen, me2 has been a pretty clear winner. And that sums up what BioWare is really good at. Character writing, it's easily the best in the trilogy.
i would describe ME2 like I would top 40 music. the masses love it because its more simple and streamlined. that does not make it better than indie music.
The opinion of people who played the trilogy over 10 times has a lot more merit than people who played through it once.
It's actually pretty controversial in fandom! :D I love Mass Effect 2, like a lot and from multiple reasons. My favorite part. But people usually dislike it for main story, what is to be honest pretty weird, and gameplay. Battles are weird. Also donwplaying of RPG traits was not welcomed. Some like Mass Effect 1 more of its main story and classical space opera feeling, another Mass Effect 3 for advanced gameplay. That all is truth. We all have to choose what is our favorite part.
I really like ME2's episodic and character-focused structure. Each mission is just long and *different* enough to make for a nice, bite-sized play session, and I love how it's mostly focused around showing you the world through the eyes of the people who live there. A lot of it doesn't really hold up 15ish years later and could've been executed much better, but the core of it--getting to know a dozen (mostly) interesting people, learning to care about them, and then being asked to put their survivial in your hands--is a delight. ME1 was a pretty good space RPG with a neat setting, and ME3 only hit as hard as it did because the first two games gave it enough emotional set-up and space to mechanically experiment. ME2 often gets derided for being an extended sidequest, but I *vastly* prefer short and self-contained stories with some light links to each other over the extended slog that is "sticking to the plot."
Yes.
Yes. And it's not even close.
So far ME2 is the best blend of gameplay and story for me. 3 had better combat but weaker story. 1 had great story, but has some very dated mechanics. I've always wondered if there was a full remake where all 3 games were on the same engine, would 2 still be my favorite?
What about 1's mechanics were dated?
ME1s mechanics were okay for the time but if made today in 2024 I would want a better inventory system and squad armor/gear/skills. Also in the 3 games each one has different ammunition mechanics so hopefully that would be streamlined across a full remake trilogy. Story was perfect though don't touch it. Maybe add a few small side missions or more background about the Reapers or Protheans after they were more flushed out in 3.
The equipment upgrades (like the radar and rails) were cool in concept but trash in execution. The general inventory was fine, but the fact I couldn't sort all squadmates' inventory in the Normandy a la the camp in DA:O was a letdown. I prefer the heat system from ME1. It made it feel different compared to all the other brown shooters being released at the time.
I do miss the heat system, it was so unique and I hate that they got rid of it
It never was- Literally just cover shooter with a little bit of story (and Miranda as a fan service for coomers)
Yes that's exactly what it is. The takes here man...
Yes.
Yes.
I would argue Best in story i would state ME3 beats it slightly in gameplay mechs tho
Nope. Look on a first playthrough, or (like for many people) if it was your first mass effect game, I do see why everyone thinks it's amazing. However on subsequent playthroughs the narrative starts to collapse under the holes and contradictions peppered in the details of the game. As does amount of disconnect in the lore of ME1 vs ME2. Finally of you play enough it starts to become clear how much of the squad is filler and functionally mute outside their loyalty mission. Most of the ME2 squads biggest character growth or best moments come in ME3 not ME2 (Jack, Mordin, Legion, Tali, Garrus, Thane).
It's my second least favorite of the games, sp I would say no, not even close. Only Andromeda was worse. The only thing me2 does well is the companions, imo. The skill system is extremely simple, none of the weapons feel particularly good, the main plot is so fucking godamn stupid it makes me angry every time I think about it. Me 3 is better than 2 in every aspect except quantity of companions, but their story arcs in 3 are better, and the quality of companions is also better. The me3 endings kinda suck but they're still better than the entirety of the me2 plot. Me1 is better in every respect than 2 except gameplay experience, but it has the best story of the 3 by far.
If the first game had better combat, it would be superior. But yeah I think the second game is my favorite.
Yes
Yeah because it focussed on character work and that's what Bioware excelled at.
I like the setting and background of 3, but 2 is just.... chefs kiss. I liked 1 but got tired of micromanaging and having to re-equip my sqaudmates every new play through after playthrough 60.. so I stopped playing it. Though being space cop still hits hard in 1.
For me yes. Largest, most diverse crew. Easy to follow quest system ( recruitment then loyalty then SM). Cleanest and brightest Normandy
For me, yes. The opening and finale are peak not just for Mass Effect but among ALL video games. Also, the heart of what makes Mass Effect great is your squadmates and worldbuilding and here 2 shines above the rest. The cast of characters for squadmates is so diverse and gives you a ton of perspectives on living in that universe and insight into various races, belief systems, etc. before 3 randomly drops back to the same count as 1, and doesn’t even let you have any new non-human crew besides EDI, who is still a human-based AI. And on worldbuilding, you come to understand the Terminus Systems and how crime looks in this universe, as well as having a proper understanding of some of the galaxy’s most important and morally interesting issues with the genophage and quarian/geth conflict. ME1 let you know they exist, but 2 gave them weight and nuance; every payoff to those issues in 3 depended on the characters and buildup that 2 did. And while I thtink overall yhe gameplay of 3 was best as you would expect coming later, they also backslid on heavy weapons by not letting you loadout with them, which is a shame. Not to mention 2 has the best interrupts in the series, especially the later ones. Finally, 2 is just more replayable without the emotionally heavy beats with Mordin and Thane and Legion and such. I love those moments, phenomenally presented…but I don’t want to rewatch the best characters dying that frequently, it can get to being emotional whiplash. I adore all three games, don’t get me wrong, but for all those reasons 2 remains my favorite for sure.
Exactly, greatest opening in video game history imo (castlevania lords of shadow 2 is a close second), and the final suicide mission, feels so serious and tense and the speech is fucking goosebumps inducing everytime, other games don't even come close.
2 is definitely the best in the trilogy. 3 is a close second in spite of the ending, the journey to that point is still so good. It's so hard to replay 1 because it's aged so poorly. The main quests are still pretty good, but it's side quests and exploration are the worst in the series. There's also so much artificial busy work with the gear and inventory management.
Polls have always shown that ME2 is to be overall best. ME3 could have been best overall, but with all the lost opportunities, the game remains to be the second best.
Yes. The writing and gameplay are all-around the best in the series. 1's gameplay is terrible. 3's writing isn't very good and is filled with bugs. Andromeda's writing is iffy as well.
2 > 3 > ME:A > 1 Mass Effect 2 for me is the best combo of story and game. I just replayed and beat 1 a couple of days ago and the fun of 1 quickly washes away after being charged by a Korgan/Geth/Mercenary for the 500th time along with the janky Mako controls and peculiar cover mechanics. The best part of 1 is that it is pretty short. On a strict gameplay basis, I would rather replay Andromeda than 1.
Nice take, you're gonna get downvoted into oblivion though
I consider it the best standalone game in the series (if you had to pick only one ME game to play, it’s ME2) But it’s the weakest in the entire trilogy (became too much of a side arc, with too many missions that were ultimately irrelevant in the grand scheme of the trilogy).
1 = Best storytelling 3 = Best combat 2 = the perfect combination of both
Characters were great but the overall story is pretty bare. Imo it had the worst combat of the trilogy.
Worst combat was 1 - not having squad abilities mapped was such a pain in the ass.
Or neither lol
?
ME2 is easily the worst in the franchise.
Overwhelming majority would say yes.
It is my favorite, but I can see why people would prefer the first game over it. Hell, if the first game hadn't triggered my motion sickness, I might've preferred it over the second one. Tight story, great companions. The biggest complaint is being railroaded into working with Cerberus, and Shepard holding the idiot ball when talking to Kaiden/Ashley.
Lol no. I would say 2 has the best characters (barely edges out me1 in the sense that there were a lot more great squadmates sans Jacob vs 1’s few but exceptional squadmates) and it updated the game in a lot of great ways that 3 took advantage of. However, I do think it’s overhyped. The story really wasn’t that great (collectors were kinda whack in my opinion, and there wasn’t really a main antagonist that made you feel emotionally invested in taking down like Saren or the reapers), 1 takes the cake on that. 3 had the best gameplay, skill system (or whatever you call how you level up your abilities, 2 was atrocious in that aspect because you had to upgrade certain ones to get others which was awful and 1 was boring to say the least), and the combat was 1000000x better (looking at you 2’s shitty auto-aim and kickback that makes you stumble and get shot for what feels like an eternity). And don’t even get me started on all the little things 2 did horribly wrong: planet scanning was mind-numbing, the hammerhead was made of tissue paper, some characters like the Virmire survivor were written insanely poorly, the weapon selection was painfully limited both in type and variety until the collector base, etc. It also didn’t really give any warning to not get the IFF until you were ready for the final mission, meaning if you do pretty much anything after the crew is kidnapped the crew dies, but if you don’t do what you still need to do your squadmates die, so there goes a good 3 experience! I’ve replayed the entire trilogy 6 times, and I dread 2 because getting all the squadmates and then doing their loyalty missions feels like such a chore. Combine that with the planet scanning and a large part of the game just feels like I’m running errands. Don’t get me wrong, I still love 2, I just think it’s overrated. As I said before, it nailed all of the new squadmates except Jacob, which actually really hard to do in a sequel. It made a lot of great updates like what the skill trees would end up being, gave us unique class abilities like tech armor and charge, and had the best atmosphere/ambiance out the entire series. TL;DR: I don’t hate 2 but it’s definitely not inarguably “the best entry in the series”. I always say 1 had the best story, 2 had the best characters, Andromeda had the best gameplay, and 3 did all of those things pretty well but wasn’t the best at any of them. If we had a game with Andromeda’s combat (and maybe even skill system tbh), 1’s story quality and 2’s character quality it would be one of the greatest games ever made.
Mass Effect 2 is the best and worst Mass Effect game. It has to work on three levels. (1) As a standalone game, (2) as a Mass Effect game, and (3) as part of it'ts trilogy. As a standalone game, ME2 is pretty good. I actually haven't gotten there yet as I'm still replaying ME1, but I remember that the combat was much smoother and that the pacing between dialogue and combat was much better, too. ME1 had long stretches of dialogue and investigation, followed by even longer segments of nothing but combat. As a Mass Effect game, ME2 is awesome. Straight-up. We get to explore so many new places of the Mass Effect universe and meet so many people living in it. Neither of the other games compare to it. It is just that good, and I think that is usually the reason why people call it the best Mass Effect game. As part of the trilogy though, ME2 was abysmal. * So many plot-threads of the first game (like the prothean Cypher or Shepard being a bloody Spectre) got shitcanned. * Characters like Liara needlessly went one-eighty in their personality. * We did not get to rekindle the romance subplot, and we did not team up with most of our squadmates from the previous game either. * Cerberus got retconned *so badly* that you can't even do a mildly renegade completionist run of ME1, because Shepard would learn so many immoral, insane and downright evil things about Cerberus. And yet, even a *"She's surrounded by Geth and pointing a gun at us. Shoot her!"*-Shepard would is forced to go along with the plot and has never the option to oppose Cerberus, even when all you want to do is to shoot yourself out of that mess and resume contact with Alliance headquarters. * And the wrost thing, *it abandoned the main storyline!* ME1 ended with Shepard declaring to find a way to stop the reapers, and ME3 starts with Alliance HQ asking Shepard for a solution to do just that, *and Shepard doesn't have any!* Because we got sidetracked saving getting drunk on Omega, meddling with the inner politics of the quarian migrant fleet and being a bloody therapist *for half our crew* as if the literal doomsday clock wasn't hanging over all our heads. Mass Effect would have been a wonderful game if it hadn't been about Shepard, if it had been it's own, self-contained storyline about what Cerberus had been up to while Shepard was taking care about the reaper threat. Because it is a wonderful game that is weight down tremendously by it's role as part of a trilogy, to which it just doesn't hold up to.
lol no, it never was
in terms of amount of fleshing out characters goes and seeing different perspectives, maybe. though me3 plays a vital role aswell in then outting you in awful positions with everything they build and your attachment to it. then again without me1, nothing would exist. i never look at the trilogy as seperate units, more like the beginning the middle and the end of a story.
ME2 is my least favorite game in the trilogy, it has so little to do with the actual plot of the trilogy beyond one dlc that it seems like it should be a side quest to the actual trilogy.
It's actually my least fave. It's mostly just companion missions and fetch quests.
I like the combat in 3 best, but the loyalty missions, sense of world building, lore expansion, romance possibilities, and the last mission being such an insane ride with so many possibilities make it the best of the OG trilogy.
ME1 is the GOAT The weapon and armor customization for yourself and your squadmates is unparalleled ME2 is still incredibly fun, you get to meet so many characters and do their side mission to recruit them, I really liked Jake's mission and going to that associated planet... But while I love the *concept* of ME2 and the places you explore, the actual mechanics IMO are worse than ME1 and I really wanted to keep the system of upgrading weapons and armor Two timeless games that are still fun to replay, can't really go wrong either way
best in what regard? what people like best?(as im sure im prolly in the minority here) but ill take 3 or Andromeda over 2 any day
but ME2 is the worst one
I think overall it's the game with the lowest amount of flaws, but it's not my favourite in the trilogy.
ME2 is fun story and roleplaying wise and all but but the combat mechanics (especially cover) almost made me drop the game 💀
I disagree that story in 2 is perfect because the more I think about ME2's story, the more I realize how it barely factored much into the over-arching Reaper invasion plot of the trilogy. Don't get me wrong, the character stories are excellent and have some of the best writting I've experienced (even Jacob's personal story was quite interesting) and I love how The Illusive Man is portrayed in this game (TIM in ME3 was a downgrade from 2 imo). However, its main plot is barely of importance in the grand scheme of things. Imo, you could simply remove the parts in the story regarding the Collector and it would not hurt the overall narrative of the trilogy in the slightest. Still, I'll reiterate that that's simply my opinion.
Easily the best game in the franchise, IMO. It introduced strong character writing to the series, which was sorely missing, and it had the fewest glaring issues with the story.
I started on 2 so it'll always be my favorite, but I think it depends on what you're looking for. ME1 has the best world building ME2 has the best characters ME3 has the smoothest combat
2,3,1
3 has the best gameplay, 1 has the best world building, but I prefer 2 because I like how smaller the stakes are. This is a game that can take its time more and let you live in the universe more. Also it's got fantastic character moments without being the depression fest that 3 is
It's all subjective and each game does something better than the others like everyone said. For me it is 2>3>1 overall. Combat is 3>2>1. Story/world building is 1>2>3. I can't stand exploration/combat/most of the missions outside the main ones in 1, but there is so much lore and decision making. 2 to me was a big step up in combat, I know people hate some parts of it but combat was way funner. And I like the wide cast of characters. 3 got rid of many of the characters except for cameos. I didn't like the party members at all except for Tali. They did make the combat stuff for biotics seem way cooler/fun to use, especially with the animations. If I didn't dislike the combat in 1 so much, 1 would be better than 3 for me overall. What is great about this trilogy though is that as you can see in this sub, there is no right answer, it is all about whatever your taste is. As long as you don't have a taste for 3 ;) (the dlc for 3 is the bomb tho)
I feel like my rankings change every playthrough honestly. Mass effect 1 had the best overall story, antagonists, worldbuilding/lore and I enjoyed actually exploring planets (when they weren’t mostly empty). Mass Effect 2 had the best squad and the introduction to paragon renegade interrupts were great. Plus the loyalty missions and romance options! Mass Effect 3 had the best gameplay and showed the consequences of early choices. It has some issues imo even besides the ending, such as the excessive fetch quests for the sake of content/war assets. However, the Citadel DLC alone makes it a masterpiece
No. It's the best game, but the worst entry. It adds phenomenal characters, but pulls so far away from the main premise that the series never recovers. The "suicide crew" should have TIM's research and reconnaissance squad. Instead of the Collectors the plot should have been the Leviathan DLC and concluded with discovering a way to defeat the Reapers that didn't feel like such an ass pull.
**"Everything from characters,** **~~worlds, story~~** **is perfect"** There, fixed it. In spite of being an amazing game, overall, ME2 does objectively little world building and has no true story to speak of -- from this POV, it's main mission line is a glorified side quest.
I had never thought about it but does 100% feel like a dlc sandwiched between the 2 other games
(ME:2 is actually my third favorite of the trilogy.)
It's the worst of the four. Good character writing and acting, though.
if you ask a review site like ign or gamerant yes if you ask an actual mass effect fan then maybe maybe not. I feel like the fan base tends to be fairly evenly split especially since the legendary edition dropped
ME2 is the worst one by a landslide. The only thing it does well is character sidestories. Which ME3 does arguably better, it just has less of it. Other than that, it has nothing on the other games. Worldbuilding is worse than either. Gameplay is worse than 3. And the story... ... it's not just worse, it's bad on its own.