I feel 2 leant too hard into the “generic cover shooter” trope pretty hard and although I love all of them, I think the gameplay of 3 really got the best mechanically, though it was also the lightest on the RPG mechanics and was weaker in that regard.
Story wise, they all do their respective jobs as a trilogy excellently. 1 introduced the world and the main players well and setups a good “big bad” to defeat. 2 is a good transition to the darker tone and fleshes out a lot of the galaxy and in 3 you have the cataclysmic final showdown.
The worst thing about ME is the continuing EAness of the whole publication.
Yeah, to be clear I felt mixed about ME2’s gunplay as well. But ME1’s gameplay in particular always felt so off to me, and if that’s OP’s only experience I can totally sympathize with that.
Mass Effect 1’s gameplay is clanky, but 2 is much better.
ME3 is fantastic. Andromeda’s campaign is somehow even better feeling, and IMO Me3Coop is absolute peak FPS.
…KOTOR is indeed bad to play, heh. SWTOR is even worse.
I feel 2 leant too hard into the “generic cover shooter” trope pretty hard and although I love all of them, I think the gameplay of 3 really got the best mechanically, though it was also the lightest on the RPG mechanics and was weaker in that regard.
Story wise, they all do their respective jobs as a trilogy excellently. 1 introduced the world and the main players well and setups a good “big bad” to defeat. 2 is a good transition to the darker tone and fleshes out a lot of the galaxy and in 3 you have the cataclysmic final showdown.
The worst thing about ME is the continuing EAness of the whole publication.
Yeah, to be clear I felt mixed about ME2’s gunplay as well. But ME1’s gameplay in particular always felt so off to me, and if that’s OP’s only experience I can totally sympathize with that.