SebasM: I keep hearing this from other gamers but I simply can not understand it in any way. I don't want to argue your opinion, just to understand it. I can not find one gameplay aspect in which ME2 is not better than its predecessor.
Jarmo: I liked having lot's of different equipment and armour for the team, not just "+1 but looks the same" tripe. It was just stupid for one guy to wear huge armour while the other go around in bikinis but gets the same protection.
I liked exploring the planets on mako. Could have been more variation there, could have been done better. Instead we got a "rub this planet until you find the magic spot". Some like this better because it takes less time. Boring as hell busywork but takes less time.
I don't like the "skulk behind a conveniently placed obstacle and then return fire" combat that's the combat meme of the past few years.
Limited ammo, is not realistic if it's done like: "You can only carry 7 clips for your SMG because it's the rule, but you can also carry a machine gun and 7 clips for that, so no worries." It's just a gameplay limitation, and an annoying one at that.
Simply, all of these are just steps from standard CRPG mechanics towards standard FPS mechanics, and I much prefer the former.
Not only that, but limited ammo goes directly against codex entries from ME1 describing how ammunition works.
Without unlimited ammo, the sniper rifle is a useless weapon in ME2.