762 réponses à ce sujet

[jlb524]

I would prefer a smaller squad with more interaction than a huge one that barely talks. I feel if they try to bring back the entire ME2 squad, the latter will happen. It's quality vs. quantity.



About people boycotting the game if the ME2 squad isn't back as a squad...most won't. A few of the more vocal elements on this forum might, but average Joe/Jane gamer won't care if he/she has a new squad. The same happened going from ME1 to ME2. A vocal minority screamed 'boycott' and didn't buy it, but most fans, even the upset ones, still did. Especially considering this is the last game of the series...if you've got this far, it's more than likely you will want to finish it and Shepard's story.

[8erserker]

Personally, I'd miss the old characters if they don't return in the new game, but then I'd find a new team fresh and new so I wouldn't mind that much.  Life's all about meeting new people while keeping the old ones.
My list... ALL Spectres. Time to gather them up:

• A turian Spectre who was a friend and rival of Nihlus'
• A stealthy salarian Spectre... I imagine he would be like Thane without the spirituality
• A powerful asari Spectre
• The one and only krogan Spectre, a rare defector of the krogan people who's mastered focusing his aggression
• A quarian Spectre who defeats enemies with his tech expertise through hacking and sabotage

[Speakeasy13]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

@ Speakeasy13 and Nightwriter
Opinions have nothing to do with logic.
2 + 2 = 11 even in base three math reads as "two plus two is four".

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

I am very well aware of what logic is Zulu. That's part of how I obtained a master degree in liberal art.

The problem with YOUR logic is, most questions in our life is more complicated than 2+2=?. For instance, how do you answer to be or not to be with just logic?

At some point in the quation cognition and emotions will have to enter the equation.

For instance, the reason why you think ME3 should have a new cast is not because of pure objective logic. Your logic is influenced by certain decisions you made during the game: Wrex not surving, Tali dying and you not liking Garrus.

[Nightwriter]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

@ Speakeasy13 and Nightwriter
Opinions have nothing to do with logic.
2 + 2 = 11 even in base three math reads as "two plus two is four".

Also, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

They are two different answers that depend upon two different premises. You miss my point.

My point is that we seek logic which supports our opinion. Sometimes we may find logic that does support it; we may also find logic that does not. However this does not prove our argument emotionally, and it is emotion upon which all arguments and opinions are founded, and it is emotion which simply cannot be proven or expressed mathematically.

Whether you like it or not, the whole reason you're arguing about no ME2 squaddies in ME3 is because you personally feel that they simply do not deserve to be in ME3. This is a subjective opinion. You look for logic that supports it.

[Nightwriter]

Zulu, Speakeasy and I are just going to sit here agreeing with each other and patting ourselves on the back until you give in, you subjectively opinionated Cerberus kitty lover.

[Speakeasy13]

Nightwriter wrote...

Zulu, Speakeasy and I are just going to sit here agreeing with each other and patting ourselves on the back until you give in, you subjectively opinionated Cerberus kitty lover.

Can't I pet the Kitten too? *Blinks innocently*

[Nightwriter]

Speakeasy13 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Zulu, Speakeasy and I are just going to sit here agreeing with each other and patting ourselves on the back until you give in, you subjectively opinionated Cerberus kitty lover.

Can't I pet the Kitten too? *Blinks innocently*

Tee-hee.

[ExtremeOne]

I will say this I hope we can murder all the members of ME 1 in ME 3 because I am sick of hearing you ME 1 lovers talk as if ME 1 is the all mighty game and its the only one that matters in the ME universe

[jlb524]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I will say this I hope we can murder all the members of ME 1 in ME 3 because I am sick of hearing you ME 1 lovers talk as if ME 1 is the all mighty game and its the only one that matters in the ME universe

You probably will be able to...doesn't bother me as I won't do this.

[Ray Joel Oh]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I will say this I hope we can murder all the members of ME 1 in ME 3 because I am sick of hearing you ME 1 lovers talk as if ME 1 is the all mighty game and its the only one that matters in the ME universe

You're not helping

[JamieCOTC]

To hell with logic.  I'm Commander Shepard and I have super powers because of magic rocks.  My ship sticks its tongue out at black holes.  I have more quads than the entire Krogan race combined and I'm a woman.  Now I have Reaper tech.  Don't tell me who I can and can't have on my ship.  I'm the hero of the god-damn story. 

*ahem*

Science Fiction logic 101:
Q. How fast can the Enterprise (of Star Trek fame) go? 
A. As fast as the writers need it to go. 

[Alraiis]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

http://social.biowar...956/polls/4680/

Now, Liara and Virmire Survivor are the only two former squadmates, that are
alive in all saves. Others are expendable => waste of ME3 resources.

=> ME2 squadmates = cameos, DLCs.

I feel like someone needs to answer this "waste of resources" argument once and for all.

What resources are wasted? Voice-over work? Bioware "wastes" v/o resources with the average playthrough of the vast majority of ME2's millions of players. Consider that the typical non-fanatic plays through ME2 once, and then realize that something like 50-70% of the voice files in the game simply will not be heard by that player.

1. Player chooses male or female Shepard. All of Meer or Hale's Shepard lines are "wasted."
2. Player leans toward Paragon or Renegade. Opposite-alignment lines are "wasted," as are NPC lines reacting to those choices.
3. Player can only bring two squadmates from a pretty big roster. All lines from other squadmates are "wasted."
4. Casual player gets bored and fails to finish main campaign. More v/o "wasted."
5. New player does not import ME1 save. All cameo lines "wasted."
6. If the player chooses not to talk up the crew between missions (this may be very common in the segment of the game's customer base that's not as RPG-focused). Those lines are "wasted."
7. If the player misses side quests or skips loyalty missions, those lines are "wasted."

Bioware is okay with recording all the voice-over they need, even if a good chunk of people won't hear it in their specific playthrough. Carry over this philosophy with regard to potentially dead ME2 squadmates.

Okay, but what about art assets, animation, design and balance work that has to go into squadmate abilities, etc.? Those would be wasted as well if someone imports a bad save, right? Yes, but....

ME3 is unlikely to have its squadmate-specific missions in the same central role as ME2's. They'll still be around, but I expect they won't be the main focus of the game as they were in ME2, in which only four missions didn't have to do specifically with one character. So, main missions would likely be the same regardless of roster. Side missions for a specific squadmate may go down to the level of N7 missions, but keep in mind that those N7 missions had unique assets, despite only being seen by those who went anomoly hunting, which I assure you was not everyone.

Balancing and designing the abilities of the squad will take time as well, but both games had shared and overlapping abilities. It didn't take too long for a designer to say "Give Legion the same abilities as Tali, but take Jacob's Barrier and make it a tech ability."

Do expendable squadmates need to be replaced one-for-one? And wouldn't those "backup" characters take time to develop? Well, no. The dead don't need unique replacements, because even the worst save will have something to work with. ME2+ME1 provides 15 characters, and you can't kill them all even if you try. You'll have two companions (Liara and Virmire) even if you fail as spectacularly as possible. From there, the best solution from a design standpoint is to allow for most of those 15, while bringing in a few newbies to keep the series fresh and help out those who endured a massacre on the Collector base.

Those who import "bad" saves will just have to deal with a smaller team. Is that unfair? Yes, but it's unfair in the right way. If you're brining in a save where everyone died, you're either A) someone trying to "see what happens" in that scenario,  someone who hated those people and killed them deliberately, or C) pretty bad at video games. A is getting exactly what they want---a world that reacts to decisions and doles out consequences. B is getting exactly what they want---no noise from the squadmates they hated. And C can't figure out how to import a save anyway.

ME2 showed that Bioware is willing to develop a deep roster, and while the poll you linked showed that players want more interaction with a smaller squad (when you give them that either-or choice), there are other polls with similarly overwhelming results demanding the return of ME veterans as squadmates. The latter polls have more open-ended options---it isn't "choose one in a worst-case scenario," it's "what does your ideal game look like?" Bioware will try to please everyone, and we know they can please those who want to bring back their old team. I guarantee you they will take steps to do so.

But, you ask, how will they do this while pleasing those who want more interaction? If they can accomplish both, they'll do so by simply doing the work. Video game sequels are, as a general rule, bigger---Bioware could simply apply more of those added elements to depth rather than length.

What it really comes down to is this: Are you "wasting resources" if you're giving your customers exactly what they want?

Hardly.

Modifié par Alraiis, 14 avril 2010 - 05:11 .

[Alraiis]

Double post.

Modifié par Alraiis, 14 avril 2010 - 03:32 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Nightwriter wrote...

Zulu, Speakeasy and I are just going to sit here agreeing with each other and patting ourselves on the back until you give in, you subjectively opinionated Cerberus kitty lover.

And I will post that link every time that somebody accuses "my logic" of being "flawed".

As for emotions based opinions, it works both ways. If you think Tali absolutely deserves to be an ME3 full time squadmate, it's because you're a freaky hardcore talimancer and have fallen in love with a digital three-finger alien.

And here is some basic logic for you:

I.
Premise 1. Less squadmates is better then more (poll result).
Premise 2. Mass Effect 3 will have 7 squadmates or it may have 14 squadmates (a section of general ensemble of possibilities).
_____________________________________________________
Conclusion: a 7 squadmate ME3 will be better than a 14 squadmate ME3

II.
Premise 1. New squadmates will be better for ME3 story progression than old squadmates (my "educated" opinion).
Premise 2. ME3 needs better everything for the story progression (including better squadmates) to make the epic finale (general consensus).
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion: ME3 needs new squadmates.

The conclusions are logical. Therefore you can't defeat them, unless you prove the premises are incorrect. I suggest you try out my "educated" opinion (premise 1 in syllogism II) first.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 14 avril 2010 - 03:47 .

[Zulu_DFA]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I will say this I hope we can murder all the members of ME 1 in ME 3 ...

Right behind you!

[epoch_]

I wouldn't be surprised to see ash/kaidan and liara return with a bunch of new guys/gals.

[jlb524]

Alraiis wrote...

I feel like someone needs to answer this "waste of resources" argument once and for all.

What resources are wasted? Voice-over work? Bioware "wastes" v/o resources with the average playthrough of the vast majority of ME2's millions of players. Consider that the typical non-fanatic plays through ME2 once, and then realize that something like 50-70% of the voice files in the game simply will not be heard by that player.

1. Player chooses male or female Shepard. All of Meer or Hale's Shepard lines are "wasted."
2. Player leans toward Paragon or Renegade. Opposite-alignment lines are "wasted," as are NPC lines reacting to those choices.
3. Player can only bring two squadmates from a pretty big roster. All lines from other squadmates are "wasted."
4. Casual player gets bored and fails to finish main campaign. More v/o "wasted."
5. New player does not import ME1 save. All cameo lines "wasted."
6. If the player chooses not to talk up the crew between missions (this may be very common in the segment of the game's customer base that's not as RPG-focused). Those lines are "wasted."
7. If the player misses side quests or skips loyalty missions, those lines are "wasted."

But, the dead squad mate wasted lines is one they can avoid by just having new squad mates.  They can't avoid the waste with Hale/Meer as it's already been established that Shepard can be male or female.   They also need to add side quests...if you don't do them and don't hear all the VO lines then you don't.  A casual player also doesn't have to finish the game but the VO work for the main quest has to be there.

Again, the wasted VO for old ME2 dead squad mates doesn't have to be there except in small amounts in size to a cameo role as they can replace them with new squad mates.

[Xpheyel]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
I.
Premise 1. Less squadmates is better then more (poll result).
Premise 2. Mass Effect 3 will have 7 squadmates or it may 14 squadmates (a section of general ensemble of possibilities).
_____________________________________________________
Conclusion: a 7 squadmate ME3 will be better than a 14 squadmate ME3

II.
Premise 1. New squadmates will be better for ME3 story progression than old squadmates (my "educated" opinion).
Premise 2. ME3 needs better everything for the story progression (including better squadmates) to make the epic finale (general consensus).
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion: ME3 needs new squadmates.

I read your poll as, "If you had to choose between more squad mates with less dialog and interaction and fewer squadmates with more dialog and interaction, which would you pick?"

That doesn't seem to be the same as "Less squadmates is better then more." by a long shot. It is also the possible that we'd end up with 7 squad mates that have the same level of interaction as ME2 or 14 that have the same level of interaction as ME1. Or, to be more precise, it may be the case that a greater number of respondents to your poll (which is self-selecting of course) prefer to have more dialog and interactions over a greater number of squadmates but would prefer to have a greater number of squad mates as well if it was feasible without sacrificing their interactivity.

As in, there may be a group of people that have elected to respond to your poll do to:
a) That there be fewer squadmates in general.
That there be more interactive squadmates in general.
c) The conjunction of both a) and . 

However, you appear to be using the outcome of the poll a) and only a). However, in my case, a) is not relevant so long as is satisfied. 

Bioware may have sufficient time and resources to satisfy while making a) effectively irrelevant. 

I would say any other consideration is purely subjective. If Bioware decides to make the game such that old squad members are prioritized over new ones if they have survived and you would prefer to get new characters, then that is your opinion. I don't agree with it. 

I'd also add that your second point is really the reverse for me. If I save a Loyal Garrus and/or Tali in ME2, ME3 would be less "epic" if they wasn't on the squad no matter who their stand in is. They would be threads of continuity through the series for me. There were people that feel the same way about the Virmire Survivor and Liara. I would hope that they kept them out of ME2 because they wanted to make them recruits and important to the plot in ME3; where as Tali and Garrus for example would be squadmates but not necessarily ones that had critical missions anymore.  

Modifié par Xpheyel, 14 avril 2010 - 04:16 .

[Xandurpein]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Zulu, Speakeasy and I are just going to sit here agreeing with each other and patting ourselves on the back until you give in, you subjectively opinionated Cerberus kitty lover.

And I will post that link every time that somebody accuses "my logic" of being "flawed".

As for emotions based opinions, it works both ways. If you think Tali absolutely deserves to be an ME3 full time squadmate, it's because you're a freaky hardcore talimancer and have fallen in love with a digital three-finger alien.

And here is some basic logic for you:

I.
Premise 1. Less squadmates is better then more (poll result).
Premise 2. Mass Effect 3 will have 7 squadmates or it may have 14 squadmates (a section of general ensemble of possibilities).
_____________________________________________________
Conclusion: a 7 squadmate ME3 will be better than a 14 squadmate ME3

II.
Premise 1. New squadmates will be better for ME3 story progression than old squadmates (my "educated" opinion).
Premise 2. ME3 needs better everything for the story progression (including better squadmates) to make the epic finale (general consensus).
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion: ME3 needs new squadmates.

The conclusions are logical. Therefore you can't defeat them, unless you prove the premises are incorrect. I suggest you try out my "educated" opinion (premise 1 in syllogism II) first.

All your premises are just based on opinion.

In your first statement, premise 1 is false. The poll is in itself easy to dismiss as irrelevant by anyone who knows a little about polls. But you claim that the poll shows that less squad mates is better than more which is a false statement. It only shows that if people have to choose between two statements you provide, the majority of those who answered choose one option, nothing else. You have provided no evidence except your own opinion that this is the only choices available.

In the second statement, you yourself admit that premise 1 is just your own opinion. Premise 2 is also just an opinion. You then try to muddle things by trying to unload the burden of proof on the readers, when it is obviously you who need to provide some kind of proof as you are the one who supplied the premises.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 14 avril 2010 - 04:09 .

[Sand King]

scyphozoa wrote...

Personally I value all 12 members of the ME2 cast over Liara/Ash/Kaidan. As far as I'm concerned, Liara/Ash/Kaidan are the 3 worst characters from ME1, while Tali, Garrus and Wrex are the 3 I want to see return in ME3.

Hope to see a Liara/Kaidan/Ash cameo again in ME3 8)

Yes I don't see a reason for the ME2 squad not to return. All of the 12 squad members (even DLC) should be back in ME3 because then it be just a waste of character development. The majority of the people on this board prefer Garrus, Tali, Wrex, Miranda, and Jack than the ME1 leftovers. The causal fan and people who just got ME2 would be more inclined towards the ME2 squad.

[Xandurpein]

Sand King wrote...

Yes I don't see a reason for the ME2 squad not to return. All of the 12 squad members (even DLC) should be back in ME3 because then it be just a waste of character development. The majority of the people on this board prefer Garrus, Tali, Wrex, Miranda, and Jack than the ME1 leftovers. The causal fan and people who just got ME2 would be more inclined towards the ME2 squad.

This. ME3 needs to be about the story and the main plot. Don't waste too much resources on developing new characters.

[Zulu_DFA]

Xpheyel wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
I.
Premise 1. Less squadmates is better then more (poll result).
Premise 2. Mass Effect 3 will have 7 squadmates or it may 14 squadmates (a section of general ensemble of possibilities).
_____________________________________________________
Conclusion: a 7 squadmate ME3 will be better than a 14 squadmate ME3

I read your poll as, "If you had to choose between more squad mates with less dialog and interaction and fewer squadmates with more dialog and interaction, which would you pick?"

That doesn't seem to be the same as "Less squadmates is better then more." by a long shot. It is also the possible that we'd end up with 7 squad mates that have the same level of interaction as ME2 or 14 that have the same level of interaction as ME1. Or, to be more precise, it may be the case that a greater number of respondents to your poll (which is self-selecting of course) prefer to have more dialog and interactions over a greater number of squadmates but would prefer to have a greater number of squad mates as well if it was feasible without sacrificing their interactivity.

As in, there may be a group of people that have elected to respond to your poll do to:
a) That there be fewer squadmates in general.
That there be more interactive squadmates in general.
c) The conjunction of both a) and . 

However, you appear to be using the outcome of the poll a) and only a). However, in my case, a) is not relevant so long as is satisfied. 

Bioware may have sufficient time and resources to satisfy while making a) effectively irrelevant. 

I would say any other consideration is purely subjective. If Bioware decides to make the game such that old squad members are prioritized over new ones if they have survived and you would prefer to get new characters, then that is your opinion. I don't agree with it. 

What you are saying is quite logical too, but you seem to entirely miss the premise that resources that may be allocated to squad development are limited, and they will either go to squadmate quantity, or their quality, or will be allocated to both ends in some proportion. And since the extremeties are quite out of question, the poll is all about in what direction the proportion should be leaning.

[Alraiis]

jlb524 wrote...

But, the dead squad mate wasted lines is one they can avoid by just having new squad mates.  They can't avoid the waste with Hale/Meer as it's already been established that Shepard can be male or female.   They also need to add side quests...if you don't do them and don't hear all the VO lines then you don't.  A casual player also doesn't have to finish the game but the VO work for the main quest has to be there.

Again, the wasted VO for old ME2 dead squad mates doesn't have to be there except in small amounts in size to a cameo role as they can replace them with new squad mates.

My point was to show the developers are willing to allow that waste if it creates a better game, or a game closer to what their fans want. They chose to have a voiced protagonist and still allowed you to choose the gender. They don't seek to cut corners everywhere they can---they seek to increase the amount of dialogue. Compare ME1 and ME2 dialoge---in ME1, many of the "neutral" lines were identical to Paragon and Renegade lines, and a lot of squad comments were shared. In ME2, they commited the extra writing time to fix those two issues, even though they didn't have to. So, yes, they can avoid the waste of new lines, but that's not reason enough to assume they will. They go out of their way to add more dialogue than the bare minimum necessary.

Also, replacing dead squadmates with new ones isn't necessarily saving them anything. Here are three possible ways ME3 could play out, as examples.

1. All-new squad of 12 or so. Cameos from surviving ME1 and ME2 characters.
2. 4-6 new squadmates for ME3. Rest of the squad filled in with some or all surviving ME1 and ME2 characters.
3. People who lost squadmates (and only those people) get replacements.

1 wastes the time and resources for the cameos, and also requires the design of twelve all-new characters. Furthermore, it annoys fans clamoring for the return of favorites as party members.

2 wastes the time and resources for the returning squad, but requires only half the new characters. It annoys some people, but not as large a group. The only people annoyed here are those who got a lot of people killed, chose to import that poor result, and expected not to pay for that choice.

3 requires a ton of work, but 1 and 2, on the other hand, are a lot closer in terms of development. Option 2 would please more people.

Modifié par Alraiis, 14 avril 2010 - 04:21 .

[Xpheyel]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

What you are saying is quite logical too, but you seem to entirely miss the premise that resources that may be allocated to squad development are limited, and they will either go to squadmate quantity, or their quality, or will be allocated to both ends in some proportion. And since the extremeties are quite out of question, the poll is all about in what direction the proportion should be leaning.

No, that is an assumption that you have made. Or actually two assumptions. You have to assume both that:
1) Resources are limited in such a way that a large squad necessitates a less talkative one.
2) Resources saved from not making additional squad members are automatically going to contribute to the depth of the ones actually included.

In order for your conclusion from your poll, which you use as the premise to your argument, to apply in the way you're trying to use it. 

I don't prefer less squad members or in fact non-ME1/ME2 squad members at all but I might choose the first option in your poll for no reason other than I would prefer to see the ME1 squad come back and be more talkative. Or 6 people from the ME2 squad come back and be more talkative. 

I think you're just setting up a false choice that if we want deeper characters in ME3 we MUST accept new ones. And you're doing it using an internet poll and a bunch of pretty tortured reasoning based on assumptions that are automatically sympathetic to your conclusion. 

It's an excessively over the top way to say you'd like new squad members in ME3. You can give whatever reasons and justifications you like for that but I don't think for a second that it is provable in the way you're trying to go about it or that there are not equally valid reasons to use old squad members.

Modifié par Xpheyel, 14 avril 2010 - 04:40 .

[inversevideo]

The way I see it, all ME1 and ME2 squad mates, and ancillary characters (Hackett, Anderson, Council), who did not die earlier, will be in ME3.

And I am sure, it will not come as a shock, that many will make the 'ultimate sacrifice' in ME3.
How they meet their end may be a result of something you do in ME2, or it may not be in your control; anymore than Presley meeting his end, was in your control.

I do not expect that Shepard will actually come up with a plan to stop the Reapers.
I do believe that a plan will be presented to Shepard, by an as yet only hinted at but unseen party; and this will initiate a race to complete the plan in time. Similar to what occurred in ME1.

Just a hunch, but I don't think anyone is safe, in the finale, including Shepard, as this supposedly 'ends' the arc. But like many Bioware stories, there may be an 'o.k., a tragic, and a happy ending' for Shepard depending on your choices (in ME 1, ME2 and ME3) leading into the final conflict.

Modifié par inversevideo, 14 avril 2010 - 04:35 .