390 réponses à ce sujet

[grant37]

hey i got my hands on a extra termius gear code on me all i ask for is a colector armor code

[DigitalMaster37]

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

I'm not sure that the Liara disappointment isn't a major factor. The Ashley and Kaidan threads seem nowhere near as negative and the ME2 character threads are outright positive about the future.

Oh yeah they are angry but for different reasons. In a nutshell Liara's character was butchered. Ash/Kaidan were turned into grouches and ripped Shep a new one. So now we are not sure why, when we were supposedly dead and now alive, our LIs could only think about how we are now "allied" with Cerberus, and not willing to listen to us explain otherwise.

Ashley and Kaidan's responses made perfect sense. The only character that seemed off was Liara. And most fans I've run into of the characters (and I count myself as an Ashley fan) feel that way.

Okay from an objective standpoint I might have to agree with you. They were skeptical of the sudden alliance with cerberus, but are you telling me they couldn't at least hear Shepard out, Shepard couldn't even explain him/herself before they started walking away. I though that part was poor, but in the end, they did get the email and I must say that was far better than the cold shoulder from Liara.

[Nozybidaj]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Okay from an objective standpoint I might have to agree with you. They were skeptical of the sudden alliance with cerberus, but are you telling me they couldn't at least hear Shepard out, Shepard couldn't even explain him/herself before they started walking away. I though that part was poor, but in the end, they did get the email and I must say that was far better than the cold shoulder from Liara.

I actually liked the Horizon reunion first time I saw it.  i thought to myself  "Finally, someone in this damn game is acting like themselves and telling Shep how it is!".  Sadly that was the last time I felt like that.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

I'm arguing from the perspective of a person that has to sit down and code the game and design each level. Tali's potential death is easier to deal with if she is limited to one area of the game than if she could be everywhere at anytime (i.e., squad mate). By 'easier to deal with' I mean coding complexity. As the complexity of code goes up, time it takes to make it work right and test it goes up, cost goes up (unless BW is paying their developers a crap wage or they work for free).

They could do both (squad mate and role on flotilla), of course, but this would even be more complex.

I 150% agree with this. As a former game design student (and future student) I am gonna second all of those statements, which also causes me to adjust my former statements.

I think we may NOT see every LI become squadmate material. Some LIs if not most will be relegated to cameo appearances for ME3. Now this brings back up the question of who will be squadmate material... which makes me think we'll see new characters altogether with all former ones being cameo'd.

yet I think we'll see the ME1 squad return in part (Liara, Ash/Kaidan, possibly Garrus)
Liara is easily explained, Ash/Kaiden are also fairly easily explained. One cancels out the other. So if Ash survived, she makes a return, if Kaidan survives he makes a return. Garrus seems also easy to bring back into ME3.

Tali not so much based on her story line IMO. Unless they decide to pry her from her people, then she'll be cameo'd and similar to Wrex in that they lead their people to fight by our side.

The ME2 characters would be a mind boggling programming experience for any programmer, so I'm not sure what BioWare is gonna do here. But cameoland seems more feasible than anything else.

I apoglize, but if what you say is true that your game designer, then you would at least know that in programming there is such things as If then statements, which are used in almost every programming language. It's an simple IF then statement to see if an character is an alive from an import.

It is also an if then statement of 1 or 0 stating if loyality is going to count towards being squadmate or not etc etc.

programming them to appear in the squad selection screen is easy enough work. Sorry, but 12 variables like these squadmates are not mountains to be climb and conquered in the programming world, it's an matter of what tree of if then statements you want to use for that particular character and what those if then statements do. Then you copy and paste those 12 times and then adjustment for each squadmate. Of course this simplfilying an very complex game, but that is the general gist of it. It's not like having them is re-inventing the wheel. 

IF you left legion to cerbersus, he's an blanked out an unchoosenable, if grunt is never let out, he's blanked out and unchoosable. They already have the code, only thing is to change the variables to account for the flags for the imports.

testing to make sure all these characters work as probably is what they have play testers paid to do be done most of whom can whiz to any configuration or scene of the game they want to play test something.

Programming code differcuility is not an excuse for bioware. Can never be. I am sorry, but as an programmer I can already tell you that I could make an if then statement in php of every decision you ever made in Me1 and ME2, and then display text boxes for whatever choioces you made, the choices would then transpire and run thru the if then statements resulting in said reactions. It's not hard, they have two games of code they have already programmed at their beck and  call and programmers will re-use that to their hearts content which they should. In the end, you would have an text based of all the converstations with every squadmate etc and every decision you made. It would take me an fair amount of time to do it, but to be honest, I'm not the one with two games worth of code already done.
+ whatever other games these programmers have in their resume of doing, they have access to all that code ontop of that.

VA's are contracted to do an number of lines, say an voice actor is contracted to do 116 lines of VA, then they have those VA lines and regardless if bio-ware suddenly does an 180 and wants to not use 64 of those lines, then they still need to do those lines becuase it's in the contract of the VA. Of course, I am no VA, but I would think that is how it's setup.

Besides, VA's lump sum would be like paying the wages of an bunch of programmers for 3 weeks of work or whatever. They get paid by line sure, but they get paid I Imangine maybe slightly more or less then an programmer or animator.

Anyways, the script was written out weeks before production started on Mass Effect 3. The Voice actors were given their lines when the script was done, they practiced, they got paid. It's really up to the writers in the end and the programmers and the animators have to do their best to match what they want. IF they can not do what they want, they have to make an serious case of why they can not do this scene or do this part. Then the writers will have to go back and re-write how an scene is played out with the same VA lines. You can't call VA back and be like "J0, can you redo the lines and we don't pay you?"

The VA would be like, we'll have to do another contract etc. It gets messy. Either way, programming is not an problem, animatiing is only slightly an problem. Voice actors are not an problem. It will come down to the writers of Mass Effect 3 and what they want.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 30 avril 2010 - 08:41 .

[grant37]

hey i got my hands on a extra termius gear code on me all i ask for is a colector armor code

[DigitalMaster37]

Andrew_Waltfeld wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

I'm arguing from the perspective of a person that has to sit down and code the game and design each level. Tali's potential death is easier to deal with if she is limited to one area of the game than if she could be everywhere at anytime (i.e., squad mate). By 'easier to deal with' I mean coding complexity. As the complexity of code goes up, time it takes to make it work right and test it goes up, cost goes up (unless BW is paying their developers a crap wage or they work for free).

They could do both (squad mate and role on flotilla), of course, but this would even be more complex.

I 150% agree with this. As a former game design student (and future student) I am gonna second all of those statements, which also causes me to adjust my former statements.

I think we may NOT see every LI become squadmate material. Some LIs if not most will be relegated to cameo appearances for ME3. Now this brings back up the question of who will be squadmate material... which makes me think we'll see new characters altogether with all former ones being cameo'd.

yet I think we'll see the ME1 squad return in part (Liara, Ash/Kaidan, possibly Garrus)
Liara is easily explained, Ash/Kaiden are also fairly easily explained. One cancels out the other. So if Ash survived, she makes a return, if Kaidan survives he makes a return. Garrus seems also easy to bring back into ME3.

Tali not so much based on her story line IMO. Unless they decide to pry her from her people, then she'll be cameo'd and similar to Wrex in that they lead their people to fight by our side.

The ME2 characters would be a mind boggling programming experience for any programmer, so I'm not sure what BioWare is gonna do here. But cameoland seems more feasible than anything else.

I apoglize, but if what you say is true that your game designer, then you would at least know that in programming there is such things as If then statements, which are used in almost every programming language. It's an simple IF then statement to see if an character is an alive from an import.

It is also an if then statement of 1 or 0 stating if loyality is going to count towards being squadmate or not etc etc.

programming them to appear in the squad selection screen is easy enough work. Sorry, but 12 variables like these squadmates are not mountains to be climb and conquered in the programming world, it's an matter of what tree of if then statements you want to use for that particular character and what those if then statements do. Then you copy and paste those 12 times and then adjustment for each squadmate. Of course this simplfilying an very complex game, but that is the general gist of it. It's not like having them is re-inventing the wheel. 

IF you left legion to cerbersus, he's an blanked out an unchoosenable, if grunt is never let out, he's blanked out and unchoosable. They already have the code, only thing is to change the variables to account for the flags for the imports.

testing to make sure all these characters work as probably is what they have play testers paid to do be done most of whom can whiz to any configuration or scene of the game they want to play test something.

Programming code differcuility is not an excuse for bioware. Can never be. I am sorry, but as an programmer I can already tell you that I could make an if then statement in php of every decision you ever made in Me1 and ME2, and then display text boxes for whatever choioces you made, the choices would then transpire and run thru the if then statements resulting in said reactions. It's not hard, they have two games of code they have already programmed at their beck and  call and programmers will re-use that to their hearts content which they should. In the end, you would have an text based of all the converstations with every squadmate etc and every decision you made. It would take me an fair amount of time to do it, but to be honest, I'm not the one with two games worth of code already done.
+ whatever other games these programmers have in their resume of doing, they have access to all that code ontop of that.

VA's are contracted to do an number of lines, say an voice actor is contracted to do 116 lines of VA, then they have those VA lines and regardless if bio-ware suddenly does an 180 and wants to not use 64 of those lines, then they still need to do those lines becuase it's in the contract of the VA. Of course, I am no VA, but I would think that is how it's setup.

Besides, VA's lump sum would be like paying the wages of an bunch of programmers for 3 weeks of work or whatever. They get paid by line sure, but they get paid I Imangine maybe slightly more or less then an programmer or animator.

Anyways, the script was written out weeks before production started on Mass Effect 3. The Voice actors were given their lines when the script was done, they practiced, they got paid. It's really up to the writers in the end and the programmers and the animators have to do their best to match what they want. IF they can not do what they want, they have to make an serious case of why they can not do this scene or do this part. Then the writers will have to go back and re-write how an scene is played out with the same VA lines. You can't call VA back and be like "J0, can you redo the lines and we don't pay you?"

The VA would be like, we'll have to do another contract etc. It gets messy. Either way, programming is not an problem, animatiing is only slightly an problem. Voice actors are not an problem. It will come down to the writers of Mass Effect 3 and what they want.

Just so you know, BioWare already had to account for the tie-ins from ME1-ME2 and said that was tough enough, now they also have to account for tie-ins from ME1-ME2-ME3 and if we compound that with all of the possibly dead characters from ME2 who will not even be in a lot of people's game, then begs the question as to if it is necessary to bring each character back into squadmate status.

Even though it is not much in regards to programming them in as far as tying them back into the game from ME2, like J said, for every character you bring back and add story for, you have to program it, test it, voice them and possibly animate them(cutscenes). Before you say it, no I am not speaking of the cookie cutter animations(combat animations), I am speaking of the individual specific ones, and yes there are individual specific ones, (quick example) you will need a "crew quarters"(location in Normandy) for them and you'll need to test things related to that and then all of the other numerous variables involved. So yes we're speaking of an increase in budget, human resources and time consumption across the board. With any company you are always looking at how you can bring the most quality at the lowest costs, and if BioWare(don't forget EA) even remotely adheres to that policy, then you're easily looking at cameos for at least half of the ME2 squad as it has already been said that certain people would make a return\\, which has to mean some will not.

Modifié par Deltaboy37-1, 30 avril 2010 - 08:55 .

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Just so you know, BioWare already had to account for the tie-ins from ME1-ME2 and said that was tough enough, now they also have to account for tie-ins from ME1-ME2-ME3 and if we compound that with all of the possibly dead characters from ME2 who will not even be in a lot of people's game, then begs the question as to if it is necessary to bring each character back into squadmate status.

Even though it is not much in regards to programming them in as far as tying them back into the game from ME2, like J said, for every character you bring back and add story for, you have to program it, test it, voice them and possibly animate them(cutscenes). Before you say it, no I am not speaking of the cookie cutter animations(combat animations), I am speaking of the individual specific ones, and yes there are individual specific ones, (quick example) you will need a "crew quarters"(location in Normandy) for them and you'll need to test things related to that and then all of the other numerous variables involved. So yes we're speaking of an increase in budget, human resources and time consumption across the board. With any company you are always looking at how you can bring the most quality at the lowest costs, and if BioWare(don't forget EA) even remotely adheres to that policy, then you're easily looking at cameos for at least half of the ME2 squad as it has already been said that certain people would make a return\\\\, which has to mean some will not.

Tough in what sense? programming? Not really. I fully admit, I'm not an great programmer, but even I can do it. the 12 squadmates is either do they exist in ME3 or not. If not, they don't get to be choosen and because of that anything they add individually to the game is locked out by the first if then statement.

even then, they have two games worth of animations for each spieces speaking to re-use.

Techinally, the flags will be ME2 only. I highly doubt the ME1 flags will be included in ME2 save from the orginal ME1. The ones that will be used will be transfered over to an ME2 import save, the rest discarded. Sorry but as far as budget is concerned, making new characters will cost more money in resources then keeping ME2 ones. You can re-use everything for ME2 in ME3. Me1 is the same as well. I think people are dis-crediting the fact that game companies re-use things... ALOT. Like alot alot. They don't start from square 1 each time, each time they make an new game, they have this new programming block or this series of animations they can use which most gamers will never notice and connect the dots unless they compared them side by side with the orginal.

It will take less resources and time to re-use an character you already have an back story for as an squadmate, then to create an new one, hire new VA, create orginal animations for etc etc.

The "time" that might be increased to make this game is counter-acted by the weight of two solid games that work backing it with all the animations, cut-scenes, textures, models already in it.

[Nivenus]

Am I the only one who gets the feeling that some people would like the ME1 and ME2 characters to not be in ME3 just so they can be proven right that BioWare doesn't care?

[DigitalMaster37]

[quote]Andrew_Waltfeld wrote...

[quote]Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Just so you know, BioWare already had to account for the tie-ins from ME1-ME2 and said that was tough enough, now they also have to account for tie-ins from ME1-ME2-ME3 and if we compound that with all of the possibly dead characters from ME2 who will not even be in a lot of people's game, then begs the question as to if it is necessary to bring each character back into squadmate status.

Even though it is not much in regards to programming them in as far as tying them back into the game from ME2, like J said, for every character you bring back and add story for, you have to program it, test it, voice them and possibly animate them(cutscenes). Before you say it, no I am not speaking of the cookie cutter animations(combat animations), I am speaking of the individual specific ones, and yes there are individual specific ones, (quick example) you will need a "crew quarters"(location in Normandy) for them and you'll need to test things related to that and then all of the other numerous variables involved. So yes we're speaking of an increase in budget, human resources and time consumption across the board. With any company you are always looking at how you can bring the most quality at the lowest costs, and if BioWare(don't forget EA) even remotely adheres to that policy, then you're easily looking at cameos for at least half of the ME2 squad as it has already been said that certain people would make a return\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\, which has to mean some will not.


[/quote]

Tough in what sense? programming? Not really. I fully admit, I'm not an great programmer, but even I can do it. the 12 squadmates is either do they exist in ME3 or not. If not, they don't get to be choosen and because of that anything they add individually to the game is locked out by the first if then statement. [/quote]

Well that is what I mean, even though the programming part is easy, the fact that they still have to makle content for each character nullify's that. It is still more difficult in the sense of making it make sense both budget-wise and resource-wise.

[quote]even then, they have two games worth of animations for each spieces speaking to re-use. [/quote]

That's a fair observation, no argument there.

[quote]Techinally, the flags will be ME2 only. I highly doubt the ME1 flags will be included in ME2 save from the orginal ME1. The ones that will be used will be transfered over to an ME2 import save, the rest discarded. Sorry but as far as budget is concerned, making new characters will cost more money in resources then keeping ME2 ones. You can re-use everything for ME2 in ME3. [/quote]

Making new characters would cost more of course and I don't disagree, but putting every squadmate into ME3 is gonna cost nearly as much. Even though you don't have to find new talent, you will have to still fund the old talent. AS far as reusing everything from ME2, I don't think that would be the wisest thing for BioWare to do. WIth all the recycling they did with ME1, there was a considerable amount of "new" stuff in ME2.

[quote]Me1 is the same as well. I think people are dis-crediting the fact that game companies re-use things... ALOT. Like alot alot. They don't start from square 1 each time, each time they make an new game, they have this new programming block or this series of animations they can use which most gamers will never notice and connect the dots unless they compared them side by side with the orginal. [/quote]

Yes of course and I would think that is common knowledge. Most all games and definitely sequels all use and recycle old game resources. No argument there either, but there is also a good amount of new stuff or tweaked things, and believe it or not that cost money all the same.

BioWare themselves said that the whole tying in from ME1 - ME2 was a difficult task. All I am saying is that, it is going to be at least equally as difficult this time around if not slightly more, and if I am thinking right, corners might have to be cut and I think this might be one of those areas. The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

[quote]It will take less resources and time to re-use an character you already have an back story for as an squadmate, then to create an new one, hire new VA, create orginal animations for etc etc. [/quote]

Yes to a certain extent. Even with recycling there is tweaking involved. And with that tweaking comes the prospect of the fact that your possibly using a new game engine as seen in this very situation. ME1 used Unreal 2, ME2 used Unreal 3 (correct me if I'm wrong)m there is some considerable tweaking going on. You can see it with Liara, Ashley and Kaidan and all of the characters from ME1.

[quote]The "time" that might be increased to make this game is counter-acted by the weight of two solid games that work backing it with all the animations, cut-scenes, textures, models already in it. [/quote]

true only to a certain extent, I think you're putting too much wieght into these factors. And the cutscenes are NOT recycled, maybe the way in which they are created is reused, but not the recycled. Textures/models are also tweaked on each character, look at all the ME1 characters in ME2 again and you'll see. Same with Animations (aside from the cookie cutter ones).



[/quote]

Modifié par Deltaboy37-1, 30 avril 2010 - 09:24 .

[Nivenus]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

[DigitalMaster37]

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Modifié par Deltaboy37-1, 30 avril 2010 - 09:29 .

[Sky Shadowing]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Conflict, development. For example, if Luke wasn't seperated from Han and Leia in SW EP 5 (since everybody here loves to use star was as an example), to go to Dagobah, he wouldn't have become a Jedi and there would have been no conflict.

[DigitalMaster37]

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Conflict, development. For example, if Luke wasn't seperated from Han and Leia in SW EP 5 (since everybody here loves to use star was as an example), to go to Dagobah, he wouldn't have become a Jedi and there would have been no conflict.

That is a good reason indeed, but I think BioWare either tried too hard or just totally botched it up, at least with Liara. I think they were succesful with Ashley, Kaidan, Anderson and Wrex. But because Liara is my fav, I guess I am affected even more because of it.

[Sky Shadowing]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Conflict, development. For example, if Luke wasn't seperated from Han and Leia in SW EP 5 (since everybody here loves to use star was as an example), to go to Dagobah, he wouldn't have become a Jedi and there would have been no conflict.

That is a good reason indeed, but I think BioWare either tried too hard or just totally botched it up, at least with Liara. I think they were succesful with Ashley, Kaidan, Anderson and Wrex. But because Liara is my fav, I guess I am affected even more because of it.

I think Bioware screwed it up less because they're trying too hard to make a good story, but because they're trying to have that good story in three parts that can be at least understood by the people who didn't play the previous game.

In any case, they've heard our complaints, and if Bioware's history is any indicator, they'll listen to them and fix ME3. And that is a Good Thing.

[jlb524]

Yeah, if/then statements are easy. The difficulty is in design complexity and worrying that you made sure the if/then statements make sense for a situation and the game is working right.



The problem is the complexity of the whole project, not in how you check that one character is alive or not. I agree...it's easy. If player X = dead, don't do Y.

[DigitalMaster37]

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Conflict, development. For example, if Luke wasn't seperated from Han and Leia in SW EP 5 (since everybody here loves to use star was as an example), to go to Dagobah, he wouldn't have become a Jedi and there would have been no conflict.

That is a good reason indeed, but I think BioWare either tried too hard or just totally botched it up, at least with Liara. I think they were succesful with Ashley, Kaidan, Anderson and Wrex. But because Liara is my fav, I guess I am affected even more because of it.

I think Bioware screwed it up less because they're trying too hard to make a good story, but because they're trying to have that good story in three parts that can be at least understood by the people who didn't play the previous game.

In any case, they've heard our complaints, and if Bioware's history is any indicator, they'll listen to them and fix ME3. And that is a Good Thing.

What can I say? I agree with that. But the suspense is honestly unbearable...and we have a long time to wait

[Sky Shadowing]

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Sky Shadowing wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I always wondered why that is.
Has anyone ever given a reason for that?
I got so attached to the characters that I don't see the logic in that.

Conflict, development. For example, if Luke wasn't seperated from Han and Leia in SW EP 5 (since everybody here loves to use star was as an example), to go to Dagobah, he wouldn't have become a Jedi and there would have been no conflict.

That is a good reason indeed, but I think BioWare either tried too hard or just totally botched it up, at least with Liara. I think they were succesful with Ashley, Kaidan, Anderson and Wrex. But because Liara is my fav, I guess I am affected even more because of it.

I think Bioware screwed it up less because they're trying too hard to make a good story, but because they're trying to have that good story in three parts that can be at least understood by the people who didn't play the previous game.

In any case, they've heard our complaints, and if Bioware's history is any indicator, they'll listen to them and fix ME3. And that is a Good Thing.

What can I say? I agree with that. But the suspense is honestly unbearable...and we have a long time to wait

Fortunately, Bioware appears to be keeping us interested with well-timed drops of DLC (hopefully).

[DigitalMaster37]

jlb524 wrote...

Yeah, if/then statements are easy. The difficulty is in design complexity and worrying that you made sure the if/then statements make sense for a situation and the game is working right.

The problem is the complexity of the whole project, not in how you check that one character is alive or not. I agree...it's easy. If player X = dead, don't do Y.

wow, if only I could have said it like that. It took me 4-5 paragraphs of mumbo jumbo to get that out and you did it in two sentences... <_<

[RobertM5252]

Yeled wrote...

Its not just Liara, though.  Liara is big, no doubt.  But I found the whole retcon that was ME2 to be dissapointing.  There were too many lazy decisions the development team made.  You had a subpar story that really didn't continue any of ME1 forward, and I felt disinterested most of the way through.  I kind of felt the whole thing was a gimmick.  Like they came up with this suicide mission idea and then contrived the entire game around the mechanic of gaining loyalty and keeping characters alive at the end.  But they didn't worry about whether it made sense or furthered their story or tied the main characters in well or took your decisions into account.  I also think they lost focus of what ME1 was really about:, and somehow forgot the wonderful characterization of the galaxy as depicted in the first game.

I agree they tidied up the gameplay, but I don't think that was worth the sacrifice of everything else.  Plus the gameplay still isn't all that terrific.  But that's not why I play these games so I can accept subpar game play if the story and characters are off the charts.

I wouldn't go quite so far as that, but there's a lot of truth to what you're saying here. It's said that the middle part of a trilogy is often difficult. Having a strong middle chapter that has its own resolution without resolving the whole story is difficult. Bioware's solution to that seems to have been, "Well, let's just not really advance the plot much at all and have 90% of the game be a gigantic side-quest" (so to speak). If indeed the ME2 characters end up sidelined in ME3, it will render ME2 incredibly pointless in the greater scheme of things.

Having said that, I do greatly enjoy ME2 and it's still one of my favorite games. I just think it's worth recognizing where it needed improvement.

[Cra5y Pineapple]

The thing is, unless the Normandy gets destroyed...again...there is no reason for any ME2 characters to go away.

[RobertM5252]

jlb524 wrote...

Yes, BW made a whole bunch of new squad mates in ME2. The key word is new....I'm arguing that new people are easier to implement in the game than bringing back old ones, as there are less variables attached and, hence, more story-telling freedom and less coding complexity.

They chose to bring two people back but those two couldn't die in ME1 and they also ignored any variables that had to do with that character. Did you give Tali the geth data? Doesn't matter. Did you turn Garrus Paragon? Doesn't matter. Did you even recruit Garrus? Doesn't matter as Shep acts the same regardless. It seems like they took the easy route with squad mate carryover into ME2 and not the hard one.

Well put. And given this sort of thing, I'm flabbergasted that so many people seem to think that I'm underestimating Bioware by suggesting they might sideline the ME2 characters in ME3.

[Sky Shadowing]

RobertM5252 wrote...

Yeled wrote...

Its not just Liara, though.  Liara is big, no doubt.  But I found the whole retcon that was ME2 to be dissapointing.  There were too many lazy decisions the development team made.  You had a subpar story that really didn't continue any of ME1 forward, and I felt disinterested most of the way through.  I kind of felt the whole thing was a gimmick.  Like they came up with this suicide mission idea and then contrived the entire game around the mechanic of gaining loyalty and keeping characters alive at the end.  But they didn't worry about whether it made sense or furthered their story or tied the main characters in well or took your decisions into account.  I also think they lost focus of what ME1 was really about:, and somehow forgot the wonderful characterization of the galaxy as depicted in the first game.

I agree they tidied up the gameplay, but I don't think that was worth the sacrifice of everything else.  Plus the gameplay still isn't all that terrific.  But that's not why I play these games so I can accept subpar game play if the story and characters are off the charts.

I wouldn't go quite so far as that, but there's a lot of truth to what you're saying here. It's said that the middle part of a trilogy is often difficult. Having a strong middle chapter that has its own resolution without resolving the whole story is difficult. Bioware's solution to that seems to have been, "Well, let's just not really advance the plot much at all and have 90% of the game be a gigantic side-quest" (so to speak). If indeed the ME2 characters end up sidelined in ME3, it will render ME2 incredibly pointless in the greater scheme of things.

Having said that, I do greatly enjoy ME2 and it's still one of my favorite games. I just think it's worth recognizing where it needed improvement.

This topic has been debated to death, but I don't think ME2 was a "side quest", at least not from a logical perspective- maybe from a literary perspective, but not a logical one.

The Reapers are trying a different path of attack, and Shepard intercepts and stops it. From a realistic perspective, it makes sense. From a literary perspective, it doesnt' advance the "story" at all- defeating the Reapers altogether.

ME3 will conclude everything, including squadmates. And I don't think the whole love interest conflict can be done through a bunch of cameos. So I believe they'll be squadmates, because I have faith in Bioware. If not... well, let's just say Bioware knows what the Tali fans, at least, will do to them.

[RobertM5252]

Cra5y Pineapple wrote...

The thing is, unless the Normandy gets destroyed...again...there is no reason for any ME2 characters to go away.

...unless they're dead.

[Yeled]

Nivenus wrote...

Deltaboy37-1 wrote...

The proof is in the pudding, if it is how you say it is, then why wasn't the mere 6 squadies brought back into ME2?

My impression was always that it was for narrative reasons. The second part in a trilogy almost always isolates the heroes from their old friends and allies.

I actually don't think that's true.  Trilogies don't always isolate their heros in the second part.  The second part attempts to create conflict, sure, but there are many ways they choose to do this. In this case it was unecesary as there was plenty of available conflict in the inherent threat posed by the
Reapers.

Furthermore the Star Wars analogy used above doesn't hold water, because Han and Leia were apart from Luke but still integral to the story.  Its not remotely the same relegating them to cameo's and inserting a whole new cast.  Most of the characters don't change in true trilogies.  That's because characters and relationships between them (not just romance but any relationship) are usually what resonates with the audience.  You build up attachments, and disregarding those attachments often leaves the audience feeling less immersed.  Its why so many people are worried about the ME2 characters in ME3.

[RobertM5252]

Sky Shadowing wrote...

They've already said they kept A/K and Liara alive because they had a major role to play in ME3.

Did they? Where at?

Sky Shadowing wrote...
Personally, if I were a Liara fan, I'd be optimistic. Not only do you have a DLC coming up that's completely devoted to Liara and likely will include more than 2 missions (which is more than any ME2 squadmate had), you also had a comic book and the possibility of Liara coming back in ME3, where her storyline will be fixed and you can possibly help her go back to her old personality.

Uhhh... isn't that Liara DLC idea purely a fan wish?