Let's talk about a dreamy Mass Effect trilogy remaster. Do you think ME1's combat/mako needs to be overhauled?

[Tuorom]

Who didn't like modding their sniper with explosive rounds and crouching for accuracy, and hip firing it and using it as a shotgun?
Who didn't like lifting a couple enemies, warping another, pushing another, throwing your barrier on and destroying with your assault rifle like a juggernaut?

2s combat was not nearly as fun for me. It constrained me.

 

[SliceSabre]

Any ME1 remake that removes the enemies screaming YOU MUST DIE and I WILL DESTROY YOU is not a ME1 remake I want.

 

[Torpedo Vegas]

Please don't mess with the Mako.

What they need to fix is putting Wrex back into 2 and 3

 

[Unaha-Closp]

Being Biotic and using Lift and Throw to fling enemies away is some of the most fun I've had playing games. Keep ME as it is, change ME2 and 3 to be like it :D Mako was fine too. Tighten the handling a smidge maybe. Still miles better than scanning f'ing planets.

 

[TradedHats]

The Mako hate is always overblown. I wouldn't mind some fixes, but I think keeping it the same would be just as fine, honestly.

 

[NottJim]

ME1 + Andromeda combat as it was really solid, probably the best thing about that game.

I would remove the jet pack though as that would be a step too far from ME1.

 

[Chewydawg]

Andromeda combat was a step back compared to the trilogy. Two main reasons: Gunplay was very weak/unsatisfying and enemies become too bullet spongy.

Anything about Andromeda is worse than the trilogy in fact.

Click to shrink...

No, you are wrong andromeda's combat is the best thing to enter the series since blasto, lol. but in all seriousness andromeda allowed for an insane amount of customization from submachine guns with homing bullets as well as mix and matching classes on the fly. The larger health pools that enemies had allowed to make more use of you and your allies abilities in creative and fun ways. I think that is exactly what ME1 should have if they were to do a full-on remake, to bring back the RPG elements in combat.

 

[Linus815]

The Mass Effect 3 running mechanics and the superb animations that went with it are a gold standard. Hopefully that animation can be the standard walking animation in all three remastered games.

Click to shrink...

underrated post

 

[Wulfram]

I think you could make a solid improvement by simply tweaking some of the numbers, mostly reducing enemy hitpoints and cutting the duration of powers. The biggest problem was how you could effectively disable your enemies permanently and make your self invulnerable permanently, but it took a bunch of time to chew through their health.

More radical changes could improve further, but probably aren't worth annoying the grognards

 

[SofNascimento]

No, you are wrong andromeda's combat is the best thing to enter the series since blasto, lol. but in all seriousness andromeda allowed for an insane amount of customization from submachine guns with homing bullets as well as mix and matching classes on the fly. The larger health pools that enemies had allowed to make more use of you and your allies abilities in creative and fun ways. I think that is exactly what ME1 should have if they were to do a full-on remake, to bring back the RPG elements in combat.

Click to shrink...

I thought that so called game put to much emphasis on damage output rather than one precision and strategy. And the RPG elements were never gone, only improved, by the very opposite of what Andromeda did.

 

[TC McQueen]

Who didn't like modding their sniper with explosive rounds and crouching for accuracy, and hip firing it and using it as a shotgun?

Click to shrink...

This was literally the only fun thing in ME1's combat, mostly because it was hilariously broken and abusable as fuck.

 

[Taker34]

I'd personally not change anything. It was serviceable for its time and I hadn't too many issues. Sure, the inventory is clunky and could be more convenient but the combat is fine. I like how much weight the abilities have and how much more satisfying the ragdoll physics were. Mass Effect was a product of its time and if you tinker too much with it, you might as well play Andromeda. I think small QoL changes would be fine.
Not everything has to be streamlined to death. If I want to play something with the combat of Gears of War then I'll buy a copy of just that.

 

[Siggy-P]

The Mako is funny, keep it as it is.

The combat is bad however you could make it bearrable by simply reducing the recoil and increasing the framerate.

 

[Iscariot]

Turn it into a Turn Based Tactical RPG, XCOM style.

 

[TC McQueen]

Turn it into a Turn Based Tactical RPG, XCOM style.

Click to shrink...

I would be totally down with that. We'd get all sorts of new memes out of it too, so that's a win-win.

 

[The Artisan]

Why do you think that?

I feel like 3's is a clear improvement on 2's foundation.

Click to shrink...

I just didn't enjoy the shooting and class power usage as much as I did in Me2. The only part that felt satisfying was the shattering frozen enemies in Me3.

 

[ClearMetal]

ME3's combat system was fantastic and they should honestly overhaul both ME1 and ME2 to bring it closer to ME3's standards.

Which admittedly will be more work with ME1, since that was an unplayable mess and the awful gameplay made me drop the game quickly after Eden Prime. Until I played ME2, found out the game fucks you over if you don't import a save and thus I was forced to play slog through ME1 anyway. In the end it made me learn to respect ME1's better qualities, but dear Lord, combat wasn't one of them.

 

[Necron]

I'd be happy for just a complete version with better performance for the whole trilogy at this point.

I can live with the mako being crap (but funny) and the combat not being updated.

 

[super moustique]

Major overhaul obviously, ME1 is pretty bad in terms of gameplay.

 

[Noisepurge]

1080/60 port would be enough :D of course would be nice to have more things but i wouldn't expect any

 

[poofynamanama2]

I wanted to play Mass Effect because I was drawn to the RPG elements. If I wanted to play a third person shooter I'd play anything BUT Mass Effect.

So no. ME2 and 3 needs to be overhauled, ME1 had a great foundation that should have been expanded upon instead of stripped down to become the generic EA shooter.

Click to shrink...

But it's already a third person shooter. Theres no reason to have lower gameplay standards for a remaster of a game with sequels that have significantly better gameplay.

 

[BasilZero]

No

Keep it the same

Just include the trilogy with all SP DLC and find a way to make it to where you can get points for ME3 ending since the mobile game or app that gave you awareness points (or w/e it's called) for your group is no longer there.

 

[YourFriendLevi]

I'm convinced that Mass Effect 1's combat systems needing a lot of work to match the rest of the trilogy are part of why there hasn't already been a remaster. It needs to almost be rebuilt for them to have a smooth gameplay experience from start to finish with all three games.

 

[Annubis]

I think ME3 has the best combat in the series but I would still be very disappointed if they changed 1's. 1 has a certain charm to it that I loved mostly through exploiting the ragdoll physics with biotics and hammerhead/explosive rounds.

Click to shrink...

Explosives rounds made ME1 awesome.

I'd use the unique sniper rifle with Explosive Rounds + Scram Rail X + Scram Rail X
Overheats in 1 shot like crazy but that shot 1-hit kills the last boss with the Assassinate skill.

Backup weapon is a Pistol with Explosive Rounds + Frictionless Materials X + Frictionless Materials X
Using Master Marksman allowed repeated usage of the pistol WITH the Explosive Rounds.
You could ragdoll enemies into the air and just air juggle them to death.

 

[Pyro]

I went back a couple years ago to ME1 and thought the combat was still fine, even though ME2 undoubtedly improved upon it. As for the Mako, I've always felt it was great.

 

[SweetBellic]

Dont touch the gameplay or assets or do some half cases UE4 up conversion.


Jusr give me a straight port of the games with DLC included at 4k 60 on console and with controller support on pc.

Click to shrink...

Would be pretty happy with this tbh. Would be cool to see all the games bundled into one too, like the Crash and Spyro trilogies.

 

[Pankratous]

ME1 would need insanely drastic rework to be playable now.

 

[Deleted member 59109]

The combat definitely, it's easily the worst part of the game. The Mako...yes, it could definitely be improved, but I don't think it needs as major of an overhaul. I think the controls are actually ok and the different planets are really atmospheric. They could just improve the terrain and maybe add some more diverse things to encounter on those planets.

 

[Buttchin-n-Bones]

Andromeda combat was a step back compared to the trilogy. Two main reasons: Gunplay was very weak/unsatisfying and enemies become too bullet spongy.

Anything about Andromeda is worse than the trilogy in fact.

Click to shrink...

Guns were fine. The Dhan, for example, absolutely slapped. If you struggled with them, then you weren't using mods and upgrades to their full potential.

Which leads me to the next point - the amount of customization is unmatched by any game in the trilogy. You can make a viable melee build for Ryder, that was never possible with Shepard.

Bullet sponges are hardly new to the series (see: Reaper forces), but Andromeda's sponges are more engaging by the nature of the combat itself. Shepard is extremely immobile, so the only way to burn down high health targets like Banshees, Atlases, Brutes, etc is to just pray your DPS is higher than theirs. Ryder has the jetpack. Between that and the combat bowl nature, you actually have lots of options when taking on the bullet sponges. And there's plenty of fodder to destroy along the way.

 

[Ralemont]

Guns were fine. The Dhan, for example, absolutely slapped. If you struggled with them, then you weren't using mods and upgrades to their full potential.

Which leads me to the next point - the amount of customization is unmatched by any game in the trilogy. You can make a viable melee build for Ryder, that was never possible with Shepard.

Bullet sponges are hardly new to the series (see: Reaper forces), but Andromeda's sponges are more engaging by the nature of the combat itself. Shepard is extremely immobile, so the only way to burn down high health targets like Banshees, Atlases, Brutes, etc is to just pray your DPS is higher than theirs. Ryder has the jetpack. Between that and the combat bowl nature, you actually have lots of options when taking on the bullet sponges. And there's plenty of fodder to destroy along the way.

Click to shrink...

Agreed on all this. But I will say removing the ability to activate specific teammates' powers really hurt considering the heart and soul of ME3/Andromeda combat is power combos.

This is also how I feel about Dragon Age combat, which I feel is at its best in Inquisition except for the utter removal of customizable party AI.

 

[P-MAC]

They would need to, the Mako is the worst controlling vehicle I've ever come across in games.

It was barely usable at the time, now it would be hilarious.

The combat isn't quite as bad but considering it was vastly improved in 2 there's no reason not to follow that up.

 

[SofNascimento]

Guns were fine. The Dhan, for example, absolutely slapped. If you struggled with them, then you weren't using mods and upgrades to their full potential.

Which leads me to the next point - the amount of customization is unmatched by any game in the trilogy. You can make a viable melee build for Ryder, that was never possible with Shepard.

Bullet sponges are hardly new to the series (see: Reaper forces), but Andromeda's sponges are more engaging by the nature of the combat itself. Shepard is extremely immobile, so the only way to burn down high health targets like Banshees, Atlases, Brutes, etc is to just pray your DPS is higher than theirs. Ryder has the jetpack. Between that and the combat bowl nature, you actually have lots of options when taking on the bullet sponges. And there's plenty of fodder to destroy along the way.

Click to shrink...

I was using mods and upgrades to their full potential. And yet most weapons felt useless on Insanity, damage output was way to low, and enemies barely reacted being shot at, even at upclose shotgun rounds.

And although you do have a lot of customization in Andromeda, you mainly fight the same enemies. It really feels a DPS battle rather than a proper fight. And those enemies in ME3 were not well implemented. One of the reasons why ME2 has the best combat in the series.

 

[gogosox82]

For a remaster no. That would require too much work. If they were remaking it, then yes i would expect it to improved tho i wonder how they would do that since the game functions as a rpg first and a shooter second. It would make all the skills in the pistols, rifles, snipers, shotgun trees kind of useless since a big part of it was making you have better accuracy so the skill trees would have to be completely redone.

 

[Buttchin-n-Bones]

I was using mods and upgrades to their full potential. And yet most weapons felt useless on Insanity, damage output was way to low, and enemies barely reacted being shot at, even at upclose shotgun rounds.

And although you do have a lot of customization in Andromeda, you mainly fight the same enemies. It really feels a DPS battle rather than a proper fight. And those enemies in ME3 were very well implemented. One of the reasons why ME2 has the best combat in the series.

Click to shrink...

I mean, that's an issue of difficulty balancing, which is tied to but otherwise separate from combat design. For example, Halo 2's Legendary difficulty is unfun bullshit, but the majority of Halo 2's combat is well designed.

What do you mean, the same enemies? You could say that Kett and Outlaw fodder are similar, but you could also say that about the Cannibals/Marauders and most of the Cerberus/Geth foot troops. Unless we're talking about art design? Which I can agree with, but again, that's not a problem with combat.

Also are you saying ME3 or 2, because 2's combat is pretty boring.

 

[SofNascimento]

I mean, that's an issue of difficulty balancing, which is tied to but otherwise separate from combat design. For example, Halo 2's Legendary difficulty is unfun bullshit, but the majority of Halo 2's combat is well designed.

What do you mean, the same enemies? You could say that Kett and Outlaw fodder are similar, but you could also say that about the Cannibals/Marauders and most of the Cerberus/Geth foot troops. Unless we're talking about art design? Which I can agree with, but again, that's not a problem with combat.

Also are you saying ME3 or 2, because 2's combat is pretty boring.

Click to shrink...

You're probably not using ME2's mechanics to their full potential.

And the same enemies comes from the main issue with Andromeda's combat. Raw damage taking the spotlight that should be about finesse and skill. In ME3, and especially ME2, enemies had a sense of identity. You had to dispatch them individually, generally with a careful combination of powers and weapons. In Andromeda it's all about damage, which makes the enemy design hard to spot. Even if they are different, and you could make the argument enemy variety in Andromeda is similar to ME3's, it doesn't surface. Killing one enemy is the same as the other. You just keep firing your gun and using your powers.

Anyway, talking about Andromeda makes me feel ill. Its combat is the least bad aspect of it though.

 

[nrtn]

I'm just gonna sit here and wait for shinobi602 to come and tease us about the remasters.

 

[giant_frying_pan]

Mass Effect is a beautiful baby and people tastes are the ones who need to be overhauled

Proud to be one of the sole voters of "ME2 and ME3 that need to be more like ME1". Show yourself, my other comrade!

Click to shrink...

Right here with you.

Changing 2 and 3's combat to match 1 would be unbelievable. I am fully aware that viewpoint makes me the insane one, but I don't care.

 

[CloseTalker]

I'll preface by saying I'd gladly settle for just an upscaled port of all three on current gen with all DLC included. However, yeah, I do think ME1 could stand for a few solid QOL upgrades.

 

[Starlatine]

Right here with you.

Changing 2 and 3's combat to match 1 would be unbelievable. I am fully aware that viewpoint makes me the insane one, but I don't care.

Click to shrink...

There are 26 of us!

 

[ThreepQuest64]

Considerable work is needed.

If you mix different genre types together it has to be good in every component/genre it does. The idea of mixing an RPG with shooter elements is a great idea that, more recently, Bethesda have done, too, with Fallout, though Mass Effect has a more tactical component to it. Nevertheless, both elements should work well and I will never accept one genre component being more focused on as an excuse for bad execution of the other one (the only instance where I would accept that is when one component is rarely used and being serviceable would thus suffice). The gunplay and combat was fine back then, but given the most recent shooters they definitely need to work on it. If you make an RPG-Shooter, both the RPG and shooter components has to be good, or even brilliant if you strive for a brilliant game, but at least they have to be and feel modern.

That being said, the combat doesn't need a complete overhaul since it still works and is serviceable in its basic form, but they needed to put a lot of effort into it to excel in that area. Especially since combat is a huge part of the game.

 

[Buttchin-n-Bones]

You're probably not using ME2's mechanics to their full potential.

And the same enemies comes from the main issue with Andromeda's combat. Raw damage taking the spotlight that should be about finesse and skill. In ME3, and especially ME2, enemies had a sense of identity. You had to dispatch them individually, generally with a careful combination of powers and weapons. In Andromeda it's all about damage, which makes the enemy design hard to spot. Even if they are different, and you could make the argument enemy variety in Andromeda is similar to ME3's, it doesn't surface. Killing one enemy is the same as the other. You just keep firing your gun and using your powers.

Anyway, talking about Andromeda makes me feel ill. Its combat is the least bad aspect of it though.

Click to shrink...

That's a good turn of my phrase, but you're wrong. By nature of unaggressive enemies combined with infinitely regenerating shields and health makes ME2's most optimal strategy at the highest difficulty hiding in the back with a Widow or Revenant. You can play differently to make things more challenging for yourself, but the game never forces you to leave cover aside from the single Pretorian fight. Even enemies with rocket launchers are countered by the god-like chest high walls. Playing a Vanguard makes it abundantly clear how imbalanced Insanity is.

When ME3 added Brutes, Phantoms, Banshees, Atlases, etc., they made the game dynamic by forcing you to move. You can see the problems present in ME2's combat when fighting the Geth in ME3 - they don't do anything other than take cover and hit hard. The proof of this exists in the multiplayer-only Geth enemy: the bomber drone. Literally all it does is force you to leave cover, and it makes the Geth infinitely more engaging to fight. Even the Collectors are done better in ME3 (MP) by the fact that they made the Pretorians way, way more aggressive and gave their beam the ability to pierce cover, as well as added Seeker Swarm enemies.

I will admit that ME2 giving each class their own distinct identity by way of unique abilities (charge, cloak, tech armor, etc) was a great addition to the series. But, as it is the first implementation, the iterations done to each class in 3 and Andromeda far outclass the originals in 2.

 

[giant_frying_pan]

There are 26 of us!

Click to shrink...

Dozens!

 

[Garlador]

I'm just gonna sit here and wait for shinobi602 to come and tease us about the remasters.

Click to shrink...

I get hyped every time, even when I should know better...

 

[TheXbox]

The game's UI and inventory system need the biggest overhaul IMO.

Click to shrink...

This should definitely be a priority. Combat is still fun if you use biotics, but there is no salvaging the inventory system. It's atrocious.

 

[canseesea]

I wanted to play Mass Effect because I was drawn to the RPG elements. If I wanted to play a third person shooter I'd play anything BUT Mass Effect.

So no. ME2 and 3 needs to be overhauled, ME1 had a great foundation that should have been expanded upon instead of stripped down to become the generic EA shooter.

Click to shrink...

I chose that option in the poll. I don't have any expectation of it happening, but I never played ME3 specifically because of the changes to ME2. I hated that game as a sequel, and the combat was part of it. I preferred the skill allocation in the first game and weapon specialization, along with the better use of biotic abilities in the original.

I also had more fun in the wonky Mako than I've ever had scanning planets for minerals. And it's not the subject, but the characters and story were also awful in Mass Effect 2. It was just a bad sequel.

 

[Legend of Aims]

You can tweak everything else but leave Mako alone.

 

[Ralemont]

That's a good turn of my phrase, but you're wrong. By nature of unaggressive enemies combined with infinitely regenerating shields and health makes ME2's most optimal strategy at the highest difficulty hiding in the back with a Widow or Revenant. You can play differently to make things more challenging for yourself, but the game never forces you to leave cover aside from the single Pretorian fight. Even enemies with rocket launchers are countered by the god-like chest high walls. Playing a Vanguard makes it abundantly clear how imbalanced Insanity is.

When ME3 added Brutes, Phantoms, Banshees, Atlases, etc., they made the game dynamic by forcing you to move. You can see the problems present in ME2's combat when fighting the Geth in ME3 - they don't do anything other than take cover and hit hard. The proof of this exists in the multiplayer-only Geth enemy: the bomber drone. Literally all it does is force you to leave cover, and it makes the Geth infinitely more engaging to fight. Even the Collectors are done better in ME3 (MP) by the fact that they made the Pretorians way, way more aggressive and gave their beam the ability to pierce cover, as well as added Seeker Swarm enemies.

I will admit that ME2 giving each class their own distinct identity by way of unique abilities (charge, cloak, tech armor, etc) was a great addition to the series. But, as it is the first implementation, the iterations done to each class in 3 and Andromeda far outclass the originals in 2.

Click to shrink...

IIRC enemies in Mass Effect 2 can't even use grenades. Campers used to ME2 Insanity get a rude wake up call early on in ME3 on Mars.

In addition to everything you said, the builds in Mass Effect 2 are incredibly basic with little room for branching development.

Here's an ME2 skill tree:

Now here's ME3:

The presence of more nodes doesn't necessarily imply deeper character progression; see ME1's incremental, boring skill progression. However, many of those nodes actually have substantial upgrades that can evolve powers in ways to drastically change what a build does. ME2 has a little of this, but not nearly as much and additionally didn't have ME3's weapon mod customization.

Meanwhile, here's ONE Andromeda skill tree of many you can choose, with the Profile system further differentiating builds.

 

[Last Jon Standing]

I'd be completely okay if they just implemented ME3's combat in 1 and 2. Mako sections would be heavily improved by simply giving each planet a more natural topography. What I really want from a remastered ME1 is a less cumbersome inventory system. Converting mods to omni gel was a royal pain in the ass.

 

[Ramble]

I just want the games on modern consoles, please and thank you.

And/or official controller support on the PC versions I already have.

 

[ClearMetal]

When ME3 added Brutes, Phantoms, Banshees, Atlases, etc., they made the game dynamic by forcing you to move. You can see the problems present in ME2's combat when fighting the Geth in ME3 - they don't do anything other than take cover and hit hard. The proof of this exists in the multiplayer-only Geth enemy: the bomber drone. Literally all it does is force you to leave cover, and it makes the Geth infinitely more engaging to fight. Even the Collectors are done better in ME3 (MP) by the fact that they made the Pretorians way, way more aggressive and gave their beam the ability to pierce cover, as well as added Seeker Swarm enemies.

Click to shrink...

Even the bog standard Cerberus mooks try to smoke you out of cover in ME3, and they get better at it and do it more frequently at higher difficulty levels. If you activate, say, shield cloak on Insanity, don't expect a free opportunity to flank or get in, because enemies *will* try to guess where you're going and adapt.

I tried Insanity in ME2 but quickly lowered the difficulty level when I discovered the game simply slapped armor on every enemy (even fodder like husks) and made them hit harder. ME3's Insanity makes much more sense and is such a blast to play. Especially because the new weapon weight and mod system lets you cover your bases as well, for example by giving Adept/Engineer Shepard a sniper rifle to hit those enemies that are out of range of their powers.