2010 GR Awards: Best RPG

Someone needs to call a Code:ADAM for GR's credibility! Bad enough for ME2 to lose out to a complete re-hash of an admittedly great game, but to list it as runner up AFTER DeathSpank and Fable III? Seriously?!

This is a tough pill to swallow. The number of glitches regardless of the size and depth of the game was almost a game killer for me. Hard reset...hard reset...hard reset. It really should not have gotten GoY

I hear you Shandog, and I love how the article mentions complete freedom. Well I got the disappearing companion glitch which prevented me from following half the faction paths (due to having to meet someone by myself). Where was my freedom when I had to force my awesomely evil character to side with NPR?

The runner's up are recorded in alphabetical order, not in the order they were rated in.

haha, meant NCR

I haven't played new vegas yet, so I can't speak to whether one is better than the other, but I know ME2 could also find its way into the action game category with all the changes in there.

ME2 was a good game, but it's not really a good choice for RPG of the year. It was hardly an RPG at all. The only real choices you get are on skill layouts and whether or not you want to be a bad ass with a heart of gold or a good guy with a heart of gold. It does get points for it's cinematic game play though.

The first ten hours of F:NV has more depth than all of ME1 and ME2 combined.

I agree completely. New Vegas won for my RPG GotY awards too. It just felt like it stuck to the true RPG elements, and ME2 felt more like a third person shooter this year and was light on the RPG side.

TurinAlexander, you obviously never played ME2 or if you did only played a little bit. My second Shephard was a win-at-all-costs soldier of fortune who didn't give a crap who died on her team as long as she secured Humanity's future. Believe me she did not have a heart of gold, much less a heart.

I am so sick of people complaining that ME2 isn't a "true" RPG as if there was a strict definition. If spending hours on end sorting through a belaboring inventory system is your thing, than fine, but that's not what makes an RPG.

It's cute when people pull out the old "you must not have played it" crap. I played it to the end, won the loyalty of all of my crew, finished every mission and side quest and saved my entire crew at the end. It was fun, but it wasn't deep. A true RPG (tehe) needs to be massive and immersive and let me do damn near anything I want to do when I want to do it. Something that can't be said of ME2.

Also, that godawful boring mining minigame by itself is enough to knock it out of the running in my eyes. I don't know what the hell the devs were thinking when they came up with that mess.

Really TA, coz I think it's cute when people whine about a minigame that is 100 percent optional right after claiming that the game doesn't give you any choices on how to play.

I was actually torn between ME2 and New Vegas. I gave both games an A-, and now, they are just about tied. A lot of the glitches in New Vegas have been patched, and so has parts of Mass Effect 2. I gave the nod to New Vegas, though, because its open-world exploration is much more open world than ME2's almost confined and linear spaces. Group dynamics and wide range of choices apart from just good and evil also make it a more forward RPG. It could also be one of those trilogy things, like the LotR movies. Just wait for Mass Effect 3. If it lives up to the hype, it should sweep many of the categories.

Thanks Nick_Tan, I wasn't really expecting a reply from GR and I admit I may have been a little border-line trollish with my posts, but I'm just THAT into Mass Effect 2. I really am happy to hear that the glitches have mostly been dealt with in New Vegas. I think they just really soured my experience with the game.

I think this is a massive blunder. New Vegas felt like an expansion of Fallout 3; I never was in the least bit impressed. Mass Effect 2 was a massive upgrade from the original, in practically all aspects. From story to graphics, game play to playing a "role", ME2 was just miles ahead of NV. I really don't get this choice in the least; I loved FO3 but found NV to be very disappointing.

Nick_Tan, I didn't realize open world concepts mattered more than all the things I listed above. Seriously, I think you guys dropped the ball on this one...

@Doc_Holliday: Then we can agree to disagree. I felt Mass Effect 2 tries to be quasi-open world with all of the planets and cities, but every area is really just a linear corridor. I also felt that having ten partners was a handful too much considering that you can only take two at a time, and if we are comparing dialogue trees and differing outcomes and their effects, New Vegas wins hands down. And the mining mini-game isn't optional if you want the best ending of the game. This doesn't mean that I think New Vegas didn't have its faults, either - its FPS elements and story structure still has their issues, though the introduction of color, reputation, and hardcore mode is in its favor. Where Mass Effect 2 is the clear winner over New Vegas is its graphics and revamped cover action system, though it could still use improvement. Again, I felt that both games were just about neck and neck.

My game never crashed, neither did Fallout 3 - it worked perfectly fine...I think it must be hardware related, all these people saying its basically unplayable all probably use nVidia cards or something