762 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

1. Stopping the Collectors.
2. Working for Cerberus.
3. Replacing the Shadow Broker.
4. Fun.
5. "Fluent shooter gameplay" & "addictive planet scanning".

1. Irrelevant.
2. Irrelevant.
3. Potentially irrelevant.
4. Could be accomplished with relevance.
5. Merely your attempt to add another listing, as this is essentially #4.

1. Stopping the Collectors irrelevant? Pardon my French, but the Collectors were Proteans f*cked up by the Reapers and were about to f*ck up the Humans in the same way. How is this irrelevant? Crumpled and clumsily executed -- yes, thanks to the dozen babysit missions needing immediate completion...

2. Working for Cerberus... I know it's not what most people get from ME1, but I'm sure it was always planned that Cerberus would lay their dirty "space-Nаzi" hands on Shepard. How isn't it a major plot point that the Galactic Superhero No. 1 has to work with the Bad Boys No.1?

3. Killing the Shadow Broker irrelevant? Haven't you noticed that he was an agent of the Reapers? Starting with his direct involvement with the Collectors and through his business practice of upholding the Galactic stagnation, which made the Galaxy a sitting duck for the Reapers to, well, reap?

4. Could be accomplished more successully with a smaller, more interactive squad.

5. Since neither of the two was fun at all, totally deserved a separate entry.

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
This I agree upon, although Zulu seems to believe adamantly Bioware is paving the way for her return.

You'll see.

[McBeath]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

3. Killing the Shadow Broker irrelevant? Haven't you noticed that he was an agent of the Reapers? Starting with his direct involvement with the Collectors and through his business practice of upholding the Galactic stagnation, which made the Galaxy a sitting duck for the Reapers to, well, reap?

Is it just me or when I talked to Liara post Shadow Broker she says that he(the Broker) was looking for more Prothean artifacts, ect out in the Galaxy to combat the Reapers.  He felt there was more out there that would be useful.  The Shadow Broker knew about them and was actively searching for a way to stop them or at least survive them... doesn't sound like the work of an Agent.

Modifié par McBeath, 22 novembre 2010 - 08:39 .

[McBeath]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I'm going to quote someone here: "Source?"

I feel that the entire point of ME2 was to recruit a team.  The story was put on hold so that we could spend time gathering a team of NPC's, make them loyal, and dive into the final part of the game. 

It had nothing to due to the problems faced by the developers or writers, but was intentional so that we could free up that time in ME3.  <- I thought I was clear with the use of the words "I FEEL", I never once implied that I had heard that from another source or Bioware.  I will strive to be even more clear in the future.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

So what you are saying is this: "ME3 will be a huge expansion pack for ME2". Am I right?

No, I'm saying you have to look at things in the context of a trilogy, 3 seperate games combined into a whole experience.  I'm no more saying that ME3 is the expansion for ME2 than one would argue that 2 was the expansion to the first game.  As a sequel it will draw from the previous 2 games.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

In my own words, I can note that should that been the devs' intent, they wouldn't have made all those characters killable, or at least would have put in some plot signs saying "Zulu! You, idiot, keep them alive or you won't be able to play ME3!". Just like, you know, they did put some such huge signs into Jacob's, Miranda's and Joker's mouths, that if you don't "remove all distractions", or there is something remaining to upgrade on the Normandy, brace for trouble on the "suicide mission". In other words, recruitment and loyalty missions, and Normandy upgrades were one game, the Mass Effect Two, gameplay mechanics.

I feel(please note the use of the words I FEEL, as in this is my opinion!) they did make a strong effort to ensure that we keep them alive.  Unless you try to sabotage the characters chances of survival they do indeed live.  My very first playthrough resulted in only Mordin dying, and I figured out how to keep him alive via sending him back.  I recall that being a typical result.

All you have to do is actually play the game, from start to finish.  Play the loyalty missions and don't go out of your way to screw them up.  They(Bioware) has given players alot of freedom in that if they really dislike a character they can "virmire" them. 

You can still play ME3 with any valid import file that you haven't modded to allow a full casualty rate.  To survive the mission you require 2 NPC's to live, which is just enough to go on a mission.  That seems very intentional.  Also, please don't post another pic of a modded Squad Select screen and then argue that "you cannot import this file, therefor we must get a new squad due to the fact that they are all dead... new NPC's for all!" since it's clearly modded and shouldn't be elegable for import in the first place.

Frankly, if your saying that they didn't tell us that we need to work to make sure they(and we) survive, they did so repeatedly.  It wasn't as blunt as saying "if you don't do this ME3 will suck", but it was clearly there.

TIM tells us(paraphrasing) to "make sure their(team) resolve is strong.  Once you hit the Omega 4 relay who know's what you'll find.", "If you have any hope of surviving you'll have to make sure your team is loyal."

Jacob talks about making sure we are "free from distractions", we need the "right specialists".  Miranda talks about it... everybody on the damn ship talks about it! 

Lets not forget that since this is a game we have the liberty of going back and playing again until we get a playthrough we are happy with and want to import.
 

Modifié par McBeath, 22 novembre 2010 - 08:45 .

[Nozybidaj]

McBeath wrote...
 I'm no more saying that ME3 is the expansion for ME2 than one would argue that 2 was the expansion to the first game. 

Well, I don't think you will find anyone that would argue the later, so you're good there.

[Zulu_DFA]

McBeath wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

3. Killing the Shadow Broker irrelevant? Haven't you noticed that he was an agent of the Reapers? Starting with his direct involvement with the Collectors and through his business practice of upholding the Galactic stagnation, which made the Galaxy a sitting duck for the Reapers to, well, reap?

Is it just me or when I talked to Liara post Shadow Broker she says that he(the Broker) was looking for more Prothean artifacts, ect out in the Galaxy to combat the Reapers.  He felt there was more out there that would be useful.  The Shadow Broker knew about them and was actively searching for a way to stop them or at least survive them... doesn't sound like the work of an Agent.

You mean a way to survive them, like the one Saren chose?

McBeath wrote...

Frankly, if your saying that they didn't tell us that we need to work to make sure they(and we) survive, they did so repeatedly.  It wasn't as blunt as saying "if you don't do this ME3 will suck", but it was clearly there.

TIM tells us(paraphrasing) to "make sure their(team) resolve is strong.  Once you hit the Omega 4 relay who know's what you'll find.", "If you have any hope of surviving you'll have to make sure your team is loyal."

Jacob talks about making sure we are "free from distractions", we need the "right specialists".  Miranda talks about it... everybody on the damn ship talks about it! 

Lets not forget that since this is a game we have the liberty of going back and playing again until we get a playthrough we are happy with and want to import.
 

I repeat, all these talks were warning you about possible failure in the "suicide mission", nothing more. But the "suicide mission" was designed so ****** poor, that it doesn't felt "suicide" at all. And your feelings immediatly started deceiving you about the importance of the crew collection for ME3. They were like: "Seriously? This was it? How can this joke possibly be all the trouble we've been preparing for so thoroughly?" But the simple truth is that BioWare failed to live up to their own hyping and bragging about the "suicide mission" and the grave consequences awaiting you there. And they are not going to compensate for the lack of challenge in another game. Another game = another challenge.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 22 novembre 2010 - 10:13 .

[AdmiralCheez]

[quote]Right. Did you see much Tali on the SR-1 in the ME2 intro?[/quote]

Nope.  But I didn't see Liara, either.  OH SNAP.

Really, the only thing the SR-1 scene does is reflect either what gender you are playing in on quick-start or who you banged in ME1.  "No, Shepard!  I can't leave you!  I looooove you!"

If Wrex had been shaggable in ME1, he would have been there, too.

[quote]Irrelevant. And it was actually harder work to get all hands killed or only specific hands, with all the loyalty missions done, than save 'em all. So I demands moar cookie, than you![/quote]

My point exactly.  Because it's so damn easy to keep everyone alive, why the hell WOULDN'T they make a comeback?  Don't want 'em on your squad?  Nuke 'em.  Everyone wins.

[quote]Are you serious? The millions who made the income for EA/Bioware have long since moved on.[/quote]

Some people have over 20 frickin' playthroughs.  I just started a new one, myself.  Therefore, the numbers are going up.  It's not like you can un-play a game.

Not to mention the people who will be purchasing the PS3 release.

So yeah, I'm serious.

[quote]I don't care much for the new player actually... Much less than EA/BioWare, it seems. All I care is continuity. Exiled Tali =/= betrayed Tali. Loyal Legion =/= Legion who lost loyalty during the catfight. Not romanced Jack =/= Jack dumped for Miranda...[/quote]

Rachni saved =/= rachni killed.  Council saved =/= council killed.  Wrex alive =/= Wrex dead.  Just because the carry-over wasn't as good the first time around doesn't mean they can't improve it.  That'd be like cars never improving beyond the Model T.

And, really, how is being abandoned by your loyal crew preserving continuity?

"Sorry, Cheez, but I can't be on your squad this time because Zulu killed me in his playthrough LOL."

The same argument applies to Ash and Kaidan.  So ONE of them has to survive, so WHAT?  They STILL won't be alive in all playthroughs.  Just because they're the only ones you can see being incorporated back into the squad doesn't mean they are the only ones that can.

[quote]Besides, all characters have not only fans, but haters. And it's easier to explain to a player why he has to put up with a brand new Batarian terrorist squaddie (any story reason), than with the annoying bucket-headed space gypsy, whom he'd kept alive only to prolong her misery.[/quote]

Said hater is free to get the despised bucket gypsy killed in ME2 or to continue to torture her.  Or just lock her in the cargo hold and never take her anywhere.  I did the same with Liara in ME1.

However, LotSB made me change my mind, and now I like her.  Who says that similar surprises can't be in store for, say, Jacob?

Instead of thinking of the SM as a reason NO ONE is coming back, think of it as an opportunity to downsize and customize your squad.

[quote]Or not.[/quote]

Says you.  Really, that pretty much sums up both our stances, here.  There is not enough evidence to verify either side.  It's like arguing over whether or not God exists, only far more trivial.

Actually, with the cover character thing, I CAN adequately justify my position: So far, no NPC has become a squadmate (except for Liara, but she was a squadmate originally), but several squadmates have become NPCs.  Furthermore, the covers so far have been used to show off new characters.  Tali and Garrus could have easily been on the cover, but Miranda and Thane were new and sexy.  The  sexy new guy/gal seems to be taking the cake.

[quote]Irrelevant. Thane is killable and dying anyway. Feron is alive and kicking, Liara's buddy, helped save Shepard once.[/quote]

Irrelevant.  Garrus is alive and kicking, Liara's buddy, and helped save Shepard twice.  The only difference here is that one is "killable."  The whole point of my arguments is that killable =/= zero chance of squadhood in ME3.

[quote]So are you saying it, or are you not?[/quote]

I'm saying that I've been able to provide just as much evidence against your claim as you have been able to provide for it.  Let us review (with color-coded responses!)...

REASONS WHY NO ME2 SQUADMATES ARE RETURNING (let me know if I missed some):

1. They can all die.
2. Too much resource investment.
3. They'd just bog down the story.
4. Not all players would experience the content.
5. They were a bunch of emo whiners.
6. Squadmates with a gauranteed future purpose were intentionally left out of ME2's squad.
7. People want quality over quantity.
8. Old squadmates can be back as DLC.

REASONS WHY THERE IS INDEED A POSSIBILITY OF ME2 SQUADMATES RETURNING (I probably forgot a few here, too):

1. Big, whopping fanbase.  Bioware likes its fanbase, enough to make an angry space chicken a romance option.
2. They only evidence to support possible death = cameo is one squadmate, Wrex.
3. Bioware did not anticipate that 50% of players would import a save.
4. Bioware did not anticipate that getting everyone out alive was pretty much a cakewalk.
5. The great majority of players who lose squadmates either didn't care that the squadmate died or did it on purpose, and therefore probably didn't want that character present, anway, either for personal taste or dramatic effect.
6. Bioware spends an awful lot of time and money on content that not all players will experience.  They advertised the balls off of Thane, but you can completely skip recruiting him.  Wrex and Garrus were skippable in ME1.  Grunt, Thane, Samara, Tali, and Legion were all skippable in ME2.  DLC is skippable.  Sidequests are skippable.  New players don't get the same goodies as veterans.  Strictly paragon players don't get access to dominate.  Add all that up, and you can see the same thing happening with a couple squadmates.
7. Ashley and Kaidan can both die as well, and Liara is not guaranteed to be a squadmate in ME3.
8. If ME1 LIs make a triumphant comeback, it's only fair that ME2 LIs do as well.  Ashleymancers saved Ashley, Talimancers saved Tali.  Ashleymancers get Ash back, but Talimancers don't get Tali back?  As hilarious as it would be to watch them flip out over it, it's simply not fair.
9. Nothing is stopping Bioware from improving upon what they did in ME1 and 2. (This isn't really a specific rebuttal, so I don't know what color to make it.)
10. Default saves can compensate for potentially lost squadmates.
11. People who kill off their squadmates are not getting "cheated" out of content because they made an active choice to remove that content from the game.
12. It is surprisingly easy to catch newplayers up with what's happening without spoonfeeding it to them.
13. Wanting quality over quantity does not correlate with not wanting ME2 squadmates back.
14. Returning characters can advance the story just as well as new characters.
15. Creating a new character takes a lot more effort than bringing back an old one.  Entirely new concept, new voice actor, new backstory, new skillset, etc.
16. Most people who want to see new squadmates don't want to see JUST new squadmates.
17. Support roles are just as important as MacGuffins.
18. The entire purpose of ME2 was to recruit a squad, gain their loyalty, and keep as many of them alive as possible.  The Collectors were pretty much just something to shoot at when you got tired of playing therapist.
19. Why should people have to pay for something they've already paid for?  Why should people who did their best to preserve their squad have to pay extra to see them again?
20. Bioware already has a history of bringing characters back from the dead.  Baldur's Gate 2.  Dragon Age: Awakenings.  The Lazarus Project.
21. The ME1 squad had issues, too.  The only difference is that the loyalty mechanic didn't exist.

[quote]78% like the "interrogation" idea. Couple it with this thread's poll and you'll get the minimum of roughly 2/3 of people favoring "Interrogation resulting in smaller, more interactive squad" type of ME3.[/quote]

I like it, too, but it's just an idea.

A smaller, more interactive squad does not mean it has to be a squad devoid of ME2 characters.  A lot of people like the idea of all squadmates being recruitable again, too.  And honestly, they started ME2 by killing Shepard off and bringing him back from the dead.  Totally illogical and completely unpredicted.  People like the idea/idea makes sense =/= Bioware will use the idea.

If the forumers could have consturcted the plot themselves, ME2 would have been a helluva lot different.

[quote]It could be said, and it would be false. Their mothers weren't running around with Saren in a Reaper's belly, and they weren't working for Cerberus to save Commader Shepard from the Collectors, and they didn't pursue and replace the Shadow Broker.[/quote]

Wrex helped stop Saren and went on to unite the krogan.  He is also rumored to have connections to Aria, who could prove to be a very powerful ally.  He helped lead you to Fist, who led you to Tali, who led you to the evidence against Saren.

Garrus has stuck by Shepard since the beggining.  He made a huge dent in criminal activity on Omega.  He, too, helped lead you to the evidence against Saren.  He helped stop Saren.  He helped stop the Collectors.

And Tali's the daughter of the admiral who was researching some sort of uber-hacking-weapon against the geth.

Liara only becomes the Shadow Broker if you pay for the DLC.

In sum, who is "most important" is a purely relative matter.  I could even argue that Jacob is the most important character, if you wanted.  Of course, I wouldn't do as good of a job on it as someone who actually held that opinion, but you get my point.

[quote]First, "Chekhov".[/quote]

My bad.  Not like you don't make typos as well, though.  I just correct them if I spot them without pointing them out because I don't want to seem like an ass.

Either way, thanks.  I suck at spelling last names.

[quote]Secondly, Gianna Parasini is on the Dark Energy too. So what?[/quote]

There is a difference between mentioning it in passing and actively studying it.

[quote]He doesn't need to be a squaddie to be more important a character, than any squaddie, including even Liara. The point is: squaddies as such are small time characters. Garrus had 11 of them, and 8 of them died "off screen" for him![/quote]

So if a character doesn't have to be important to be a squaddie, and a character doesn't have to be a squaddie to be important, why are you so adamant that Liara and the VS will be back on the team?  Marketing strategies?  That's it?  When the same can be done with ME2 squadmates?  In the default save?  Where you'd only miss out if you killed them on purpose?

The 8 offstage deaths were members of a squaddie's squad.  Shepard's squad > Shepard's squad's squads.

[quote]Since Joker is not a squaddie, I can give him in to you... BTW, check the OP. I was proposing to have him join the ME3 squad a while back![/quote]

This is where your argument falls apart.  You are insisting that Liara and VS are going to be squadmates because they are important, while you just said that an important character doesn't have to be a squadmate.

Wait, scratch that: you are assuming that they will be squadmates because they have a 100% survival rate.  Well, so do Anderson and Chakwas.  So do Udina, Khalisa al-Jilani, Emily Wong, and Refund Guy.

Possible death =/= not going to be a squadmate.  Lack of importance =/= not going to be a squadmate.  Hopefully, I have provided sufficient evidence as to why.

(Why, yes, let's have a man with brittle bones and minimal combat experience follow you around with a Cain strapped to his back.  Trololololo-lololo-lololol....)

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 22 novembre 2010 - 08:53 .

[McBeath]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

You mean a way to survive them, like the one Saren chose?

Perhaps, perhaps not.  We'll just have to leave that nugget in the hands of Bioware's capible writers and wait and see.  I like to think it forshadows some neat Prothean tech we can use, but that's just me.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I repeat, all these talks were warning you about possible failure in the "suicide mission", nothing more. But the "suicide mission" was designed so ****** poor, that it doesn't felt "suicide" at all. And your feelings immediatly started deceiving you about the importance of the crew collection for ME3. They were like: "Seriously? This was it? How can this joke possibly be all the trouble we've been preparing for so thoroughly?" But the simple truth is that BioWare failed to live up to their own hyping an bragging about the "suicide mission" and the grave cosequences awaiting you there. And they are not going to compensate for the lack of challenge in another game. Another game = another challenge.

If Bioware failed it was only that they failed to live up to your expectations of ME2.  Not mine.  You had pre-conceptions about what you knew ME2 was gonna be, and it wasn't. 

You have preconceptions about what ME3 is going to be, and something tells me that your gonna be disappointed again

This sums up nicely what I've been saying: You have issues with the game.  You don't like the execution of the story, the characters and the level of interacting, ect.  That, and I think it actually bothers you that other people like the characters and game mechanics, so you start numerous(and I do mean numerous) threads about it just to vent your own disappointment. 

Modifié par McBeath, 22 novembre 2010 - 09:17 .

[Zulu_DFA]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

...Some Rainbow...

1. The amount of text you've typed does not correspond with the weight of the arguments.
2. Some arguments from Part Two I'd actually put into Part One, mainly the ones dealing with BioWare's not anticipating something. If we were discussing e-mail vs. cameo treatment, it'd be one thing. As we are discussing cameo vs. squad, they work my way.
3. All those arguments I've seen and addressed before many times in this or in that thread. So, if you'll excuse me...

AdmiralCheez wrote...
This is where your argument falls apart.  You are insisting that Liara and VS are going to be squadmates because they are important, while you just said that an important character doesn't have to be a squadmate.

My argument doesn't fall apart. I am insisting that plot (un)importance is one of the factors, along with expendability, "pissability", all kinds of "fairness" considerations, etc.

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Wait, scratch that: you are assuming that they will be squadmates because they have a 100% survival rate.  Well, so do Anderson and Chakwas.

Gocha!!!! Chakwas can die. All your arguments become invalid, return all you funds to bank, go to jail, skip 2 turns.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

(Why, yes, let's have a man with brittle bones and minimal combat experience follow you around with a Cain strapped to his back.  Trololololo-lololo-lololol....)

Trololo or not, Heavy Bone Weave.

[AdmiralCheez]

1. The amount of text you've typed does not correspond with the weight of the arguments.

Well, of coure it doesn't.  However, each response was well thought-out and contributed something to my case.  I am not one for "fluff," Mr. Zulu.

2. Some arguments from Part Two I'd actually put into Part One, mainly the ones dealing with BioWare's not anticipating something. If we were discussing e-mail vs. cameo treatment, it'd be one thing. As we are discussing cameo vs. squad, they work my way.

I would not have included each argument unless it supported my case.  The fact that these arguments can be made to support either side only further emphasizes that neither one is fully justified or varifiable.

Cameos might as well be an email: see VS treatment in ME2.

Bioware's failure to anticipate player response DOES support my side for the following reasons:
1. ME3's story is not set in stone.  They still have time to make adjustments to correspond with player feedback.
2. The fact that the suicide mission wasn't very suicidal at all increases the probability of returning squadmates.  The ability for them to die at all is what is causing the ambiguity, hence why this thread is over 20 pages.
3. The fact that many more people imported saves than anticipated shows that they have a whole helluva lot of returning customers.  Therefore, they can assume that ME3 will have a whole helluva lot of ME2 save imports as well.  Because more people are using the feature, Bioware can afford to do more with it.

All those arguments I've seen and addressed before many times in this or in that thread. So, if you'll excuse me...

You and your accursed links.  Anyway, if you had done a satisfactory job of covering my points, I would have shut the hell up by now.  As of yet, you seem to be skipping a lot of them.  You dodged the whole rainbow, dismissing at as "more text =/= stronger argument."  I don't type this stuff without thinking about it first.  You present a point, I cover it.  You point out a mistake, I correct it.  You type a wall of text, I respond to the whole damn thing, regardless of whether or not it's a huge mess of copypasta.

Is it too much to ask that you show the same courtesy?

My argument doesn't fall apart. I am insisting that plot (un)importance is one of the factors, along with expendability, "pissability", all kinds of "fairness" considerations, etc.

Something is not expendable just because it can die.  In fact, the possibility of losing something makes it all the more precious.  A bit silly to include in a discussion about videogames, but if the ME series is finally going to live up to its promises of BIG CHOICES and BIG CONSEQUENCES , this is a lovely opportunity to do so.

What is more fair, letting a handful of ME1 squadmates return but absolutely none from ME2, or allowing both a handful of ME1 and 2 squadmates to return?  What is more fair, denying content to everyone just because a few people didn't want it, or making that content available to those that want it while making it easy to remove for people who don't like it?

If ME2 squaddies don't get to return, then neither do Liara or the VS.  I'd say Liara does a wonderful job with that cameo of hers...

Gocha!!!! Chakwas can die. All your arguments become invalid, return all you funds to bank, go to jail, skip 2 turns.

Sorry, I thought that Chakwas always survived.  My mistake.  Either way, the rest live no matter what.  My argument still stands; all you have to do is cross out Chakwas.

Trololo or not, Heavy Bone Weave.

If they Heavy Bone Weave Joker, they Lazarus the ME2 squad.

[HolyJellyfish]

Zulu_DFA wrote...


I repeat, all these talks were warning you about possible failure in the "suicide mission", nothing more. But the "suicide mission" was designed so ****** poor, that it doesn't felt "suicide" at all. And your feelings immediatly started deceiving you about the importance of the crew collection for ME3. They were like: "Seriously? This was it? How can this joke possibly be all the trouble we've been preparing for so thoroughly?" But the simple truth is that BioWare failed to live up to their own hyping and bragging about the "suicide mission" and the grave consequences awaiting you there. And they are not going to compensate for the lack of challenge in another game. Another game = another challenge.

You play it on Insanity and tell me it isn't suicide.

I went through it on Insanity, without Game FAQ spoilers. I had three characters die on me and my teeth were on edge the entire time.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

1. Stopping the Collectors irrelevant? Pardon my French, but the Collectors were Proteans f*cked up by the Reapers and were about to f*ck up the Humans in the same way. How is this irrelevant? Crumpled and clumsily executed -- yes, thanks to the dozen babysit missions needing immediate completion...

2. Working for Cerberus... I know it's not what most people get from ME1, but I'm sure it was always planned that Cerberus would lay their dirty "space-Nаzi" hands on Shepard. How isn't it a major plot point that the Galactic Superhero No. 1 has to work with the Bad Boys No.1?

3. Killing the Shadow Broker irrelevant? Haven't you noticed that he was an agent of the Reapers? Starting with his direct involvement with the Collectors and through his business practice of upholding the Galactic stagnation, which made the Galaxy a sitting duck for the Reapers to, well, reap?

4. Could be accomplished more successully with a smaller, more interactive squad.

5. Since neither of the two was fun at all, totally deserved a separate entry.

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
This I agree upon, although Zulu seems to believe adamantly Bioware is paving the way for her return.

You'll see.

1. Aye, however what was the relevance? All we learned was the Collectors were mutated Protheans and it was not until some time into the game. If I were to quote Vigil (the VI on Ilos) from Mass Effect: "In the end what does it matter?

Their existence did not advance the plot nor did our knowledge of what they were prior to this mutation serve to accomplish anything. Was it interesting? Certainly. Interest unfortunately does not constitute relevance. If Mass Effect 3 is as you believe it to be, the Collectors will likely have a vague reference similar to the Council and Saren preceding them and the entire game would be completely forgotten. Of course poor writing could lead to their irrelevance even with a full cast. All the same, the Collectors had as much a direct impact on the plot as the Blue Suns. Ironically, you fight those Blue Suns more.

2. Because it accomplished nothing. The plot remained precisely the same... as in it did not move. Frankly, I found the lack of impact Cerberus had on the first game diminished their about threat. Regardless, their relevance is only important if continuality is apparent and when the entire game is devoted to recruiting a team. Their absence voids a large portion of the game's prior content. And before you scream "a team for the suicide mission!" If this is true, it only further proves Mass Effect 2 was a complete waste of time. To put it plainly...

"Spend twenty five hours recruiting a bunch of characters in desperate need of therapy, solve their daddy issues, go kill a group of bugs with no character development all so you can spend five minutes talking to them in the next game! Remember... SAVE THOSE FILES!!"

Seriously, I would like to believe this is not what Bioware intended for Mass Effect 2, yet your scenario is essentially that.

3. Except he is not. He was assisting the Collectors in a futile attempt to preserve his own life. His business antics were merely the actions of a greed obsessed narcissist. He only bartered Shepard's body because he believed it would help him personally. He was targeted by Liara because of selling Shepard's body and her desire for revenge when she believed Feron.

Besides, what happens if I do not play LoTSB? OH NOES! Content I might miss! Liara best be made a cameo just in case. See? I can use that argument against you.

4. Could also be accomplished with the return of the ME2 cast. Granted, I will agree on the notion of less squad mates, more development is the superior option.

5. In your opinion only. I had qualms with neither.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 22 novembre 2010 - 11:30 .

[Elite Midget]

Bioware errored when they made the ME2 Squadies killable. It's too late to change that now and Bioware knows it. Well, unless they release a patch that forces you to save the whole crew...

Though I doubt they will. Take this as a learning experience for Bioware. Wanting to make every part of the Trilogy a stand alone thing they ended up alienateing fans from each part of the series. The death of Wrex and ME2 Squadies is proof that Bioware didn't factor how fans felt about not getting Squadies back.

I bet you that Bioware wished they had somehow got the Data Gathering Thing up and going when ME1 hit. If they had I bet you that VS and Liara would have remained in the Squad and the Suicide Mission wouldn't be a Baby Sitting Sidequest and none of the ME2 Squadies would be killable. Well, at least not most of them.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 22 novembre 2010 - 11:44 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Only time will tell, Elite. Only time will tell.



Right now, I'm gathering data on squad survival rates. Maybe we can use this as a predictor to see if anyone's coming back..I'll post the results when I have enough data points. Please help out!

[Da_Lion_Man]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Only time will tell, Elite. Only time will tell.

Right now, I'm gathering data on squad survival rates. Maybe we can use this as a predictor to see if anyone's coming back..I'll post the results when I have enough data points. Please help out!

I don't think these forums are a good indication, sometimes I feel like I'm the only one who got someone killed. I'm sure there are a lot of other people who made at least one mistake?

[AdmiralCheez]

Actually, there are a pretty fair amount. If you look at the people who already posted, there are several who are killing characters as a plot device.

[Zulu_DFA]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Bioware's failure to anticipate player response DOES support my side for the following reasons:

It doesn't work your way for one single reason: You don't know what they had been planning to do with the ME2 squadmates before they got the feedback. You don't know what to start with. Chances are they were planning short VS-like cameos for some, e-mails for others. Now they may consider other options up to LotSB-like cameos or even paid/promo DLC squadmate roles for the most popular ones. But the main plan (Liara+VS+newfaces) for the vanilla ME3 won't be altered.

AdmiralCheez wrote...
If they Heavy Bone Weave Joker, they Lazarus the ME2 squad.

Actually, it looks like they've Heavy Bone Weave'd Joker already. He just keeps whining to draw attention, or as a matter of habit.

HolyJellyfish wrote...
I went through it on Insanity, without Game FAQ spoilers. I had three characters die on me and my teeth were on edge the entire time.

That's truly outstanding, but the difficulty level does not affect the "suicide mission" fatalities, or dialogue persuasion checks.

Elite Midget wrote...
Bioware errored when they made the ME2 Squadies killable. It's too late to change that now and Bioware knows it. Well, unless they release a patch that forces you to save the whole crew...

Same thoughts here. I might only add that seeing how BioWare refused to fix ME1's gameplay and decided to start from scratch, I wouldn't expect them to even consider making amends plotwise for the expendables. (And don't site Liara here, LotSB was planned all the way back to Redemption).

If they try, however, I wish them luck. They'll need it. And a lot of composure too, while they'll be reading through all the Tali, Miranda and Garrus fanfics, in order to listen to them and avoid pissing off any one of their precious fan bases.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 23 novembre 2010 - 12:32 .

[Nashiktal]

I've considered killing Tali off, my sheps love interest, for that very reason.

[luakel]

Elite Midget wrote...

Bioware errored when they made the ME2 Squadies killable. It's too late to change that now and Bioware knows it. Well, unless they release a patch that forces you to save the whole crew...

Though I doubt they will. Take this as a learning experience for Bioware. Wanting to make every part of the Trilogy a stand alone thing they ended up alienateing fans from each part of the series. The death of Wrex and ME2 Squadies is proof that Bioware didn't factor how fans felt about not getting Squadies back.

I bet you that Bioware wished they had somehow got the Data Gathering Thing up and going when ME1 hit. If they had I bet you that VS and Liara would have remained in the Squad and the Suicide Mission wouldn't be a Baby Sitting Sidequest and none of the ME2 Squadies would be killable. Well, at least not most of them.

Who says they alienated fans from each part? I've seen a figure thrown around that based on the Data Gathering, that 50% of people carried saves over between the games. That indicates that around that number, if not more, were buyers of ME2 that had an ME1 to import from. I don't know about the sales data for each game, but it did feel like there was a bit more hype around ME2, and it's done better overall critically (which is subjective, but still). The closest thing I can find for sales data is 2 million copies of ME2 sold in the first week. And if around 1/2 of those (if not more, since ME1 fans would be quicker to buy it) were able to carry over saves... that's an awful lot of people who were un-alienated enough to buy the game.

I'm sure they did wish they'd been able to collect data from ME1, it would have enabled them to respond to fan concerns even more effectively. But they did change alot of things that were complained about. The Mako got complaints, the elevators got complaints, the stupid hacking game got complaints... Lo and behold, none of those are in the sequel. Or if they are, like hacking, they're a bit more varied. Bioware changed alot of things without having data gathering at all.

And if they say they're surprised that so many people carried saves over, that indicates people like the idea of continuity between games. Maybe they didn't plan on it, and maybe they didn't plan on having so many players get all/most of their squad through the SM. But that's no reason to assume that the SM didn't work out as intended and the plot Bioware has in mind for ME3 is incompatible with how ME2 ended up. I'm sure they had the framework of ME3 worked out before ME2 was released, but not the squadmates, the specific missions, etc. They're working on them right now, and that data from save games can aid development.

Besides, there's alot of people who clearly don't like seeing most ME1 characters reduced to cameos. If Bioware didn't realize that, they wouldn't be assuring fans that they won't just be cameos in ME3. And based on the precedent of how those cameos were recieved, I bet they'll decide that relegating all ME2 squaddies to cameos as well wouldn't go over too well. Doing the same thing twice would produce the same reaction now as it did the first time; a lot of disappointed fans wanting their old squadmates back. And this time there's no ME3 to promise their return in; if someone like Garrus just gets a cameo in ME3, that cameo may be the last time he ever shows up in a game.

[Spectre_907]

Aside from continuing any romance subplots, I do not see any reason why any squadmates from Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 would be recruitable for the entire game of Mass Effect 3.

We have nothing suggesting that Ashley/Kaidan is integral to stopping the reapers and it is clear that her/his loyalty to the Alliance inhibits her/him from seeing the real threat anyway. Nothing suggests that they will be recruitable in ME3. Liara will be too occupied with the Shadow Broker's information netowork and is clear in helping you stop the Reapers in that way. Wrex is busy uniting the krogan. Whether or not the ME2 squadmates could return as recruitable is either unknown or dependent on choices made but we have no idea how ME3 will even progress. The claim that ME2 squad will not return because they are expendable means nothing. You, as Shepard, are expendable but clearly you will be coming back.

That said, for any new squadmates, I think Feron and Kai Leng are good candidates.

Modifié par Spectre_907, 23 novembre 2010 - 01:20 .

[ReluctantMind]

It seems like killing characters as a plot device would only be rewarding if the ME2 squad returned in ME3 with more than brief cameos.



Seriously, though. I have hope (definitely not knowledge) that Bioware will return at least some of the ME2 squad in significant roles for the following reasons:

1. Bioware is a company and companies do what will make them profit. There have been multiple references to the fact that Bioware was surprised by the large number of imports. That means a lot of fans who have become attached to at least some of the ME2 squad. I suspect the ones who are done with the ME2 squad constitute a much smaller number.

2. There have been a number of posts by people claiming they will not buy the game if they have to recruit a whole new squad. A large number of those people will of course buy the game, but the number of people who will follow through on that is not zero. The greater threat to Bioware's bottom line is that a large number of people will hold off on buying the game due to frustration and buy it following the price drops or buy it used.

3. In contrast to #2 above, I have not seen a single post by anyone claiming they will not buy the game if the old squad returns. They may exist, but they would be extremely rare.

4. The most vocal fans will also be the ones writing many of the early fan reviews for ME3. Fan service and loyalty to fans is not because Bioware loves us as people, they want our money (Note: I have no problem with this fact). A flood of angry fans probably does not do a whole lot for a game's early numbers.

5. I agree with the argument that we supposedly recruited the "best of the best" and it would feel stupid to have to recruit anew. Did we catch every awesome possible squad member in the galaxy with these twelve? Of course not, but it still makes me think of my favorite line from Hot Shots Part Deux when Topper Harley is being recruited to rescue the Iraqi hostages. Previous attempts have failed and so now they have to "go in to get the men that went in to get the men that went in to get the men". When Topper asks why they want him he is told "you're the best of what's left".



Bottom line for me is that I think it is more in Bioware's economic interests to bring back most/all of the living squad for more than basic cameos. This could include one-shot missions in the vein of the LotSB, but would exclude the VS Horizon treatment or Wrex treatment. I freely admit I could be completely wrong or that my assumptions could be completely incorrect, but I maintain hope that I will be able to truly play the game with my old squaddies. I by no stretch see them as used up or unable to advance the story.

[AdmiralCheez]

It doesn't work your way for one single reason: You don't know what they had been planning to do with the ME2 squadmates before they got the feedback. You don't know what to start with. Chances are they were planning short VS-like cameos for some, e-mails for others. Now they may consider other options up to LotSB-like cameos or even paid/promo DLC squadmate roles for the most popular ones. But the main plan (Liara+VS+newfaces) for the vanilla ME3 won't be altered.

You don't know what they were planning, either.  You do not know how far they are into development.  You do not know how much the game will change from what they have so far.  See?  Here we go again.  Your "evidence" can be used against you.

Seriously, Zulu, I expected better.  You are repeatedly insisting that your opinion is fact, when I have shown that the evidence in your favor is minimal.  You spent most of this debate either ignoring the meat of my arguments or repeating yourself.  I have made a case against each and every one of your points.  In the event that I was unable to, I admitted it.  I have actively gathered evidence to support my case to the best of my ability at the time.  I actually took an additional step to collect more data.  I have done my best to treat you with respect.  I have agreed with you at times, admitted my own shortcomings, acknowledged that there is a possibility of your theories being truthful.  I have seen no similar effort on your part.

In sum, you are a serious jerk.  An opinionated, stubborn, pessimistic, trolltastic ****.  I have avoided personal insults up to this point, but if you are not going to respect me, or anyone else on this thread except those that agree with you, you can cram your "facts" where the sun don't shine.

If your intention was to frustrate me to the point of insults, congratulations.  But I'm not going to continue this if you aren't going to add anything new to the discussion.  There was a glimmer of hope for a while: you made some very intelligent comments and observations, and some of the stuff you wrote was downright funny.  But you're treating me like an inferior, like my opinion is inferior. Pardon me for not liking it.  And if I sound like a self-righteous blowhard, fine.  Whatever.  Call me out for being a whiner all you want.  Only fair since I just called you plenty of names, right?

People would take you a lot more seriously if you weren't such a douche.  Some suggestions for you for future debates:

1. Address every point your opponent makes.
2. Don't quotemine.
3. Admit it when you have no rebuttal.
4. Be nice.
5. Honestly, enough with your shameless self-promotion.  You spam thread after thread with links to your own.  Are you that desperate for attention?  Really? (Before you say I posted links, too, that was for the purpose of gathering more data.  And I do it much more sparingly than you.)

Anyway, it was fun while it lasted, but this is just silly.

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

"I'm going to go find a game I don't like, then spam the forum complaining about it. That's my idea of fun!"

[Zulu_DFA]

@ AdmiralCheez

I have no purpose of winning the Internet over to my cause or something... Not yet anyway, he-he! So I don't really care if I am "taken seriously" here or not. Some people find my theories plausible, some don't. And it's fine and fun by me.

What's not fun is some people starting to teach me how to live all of a sudden.

So take it or leave it. Time is up to let this thread die anyway, so fear not, I won't be linking it anymore anywhere.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 23 novembre 2010 - 10:10 .

[GracefulChicken]

If only you guys studied something of importance as much as you have this video game...

[Elite Midget]

It's more fun and enjoyable to study a Video Game than stuff that will further us in life. It's sorta like studying on Ancient Warfare or reading things like RoTK even though you don't plan to ever become a General.