390 réponses à ce sujet

[Unit-Alpha]

kraidy1117 wrote...



You need two people alive to import your Shepard.

Liara and Ash/Kaidan and two people from ME2, Theres your squad and you get a bigger one if you have more people alive.

That is EXACTLY what I want. If you fail, you deserve to have fewer people to help you. However, new players should not get several of the past teammates in order to make using an imprt a viable idea.

[RobertM5252]

aynxalot wrote...

Voice actors aren't exactly paid by the hour. Doing a whole lot of dialogue is going to be no more expensive than doing a little, so they may as well do a fuller role rather than a cameo for everyone.

They're not "paid by the hour," true, but if you think the number of lines they'll be performing has no bearing on their contract then I don't know what to tell you. I sincely doubt Alli Hillis (Liara) was paid as much for ME2 as ME1 nor as much as Liz Sroka (Tali), who likely got as much or more for ME2 as ME1.

Game developers cannot completely ignore the bottom line. Developing content that some of the playerbase may never even see is a waste of resources. It was a driving force for Blizzard when they developed World of Warcraft's latest expansion, Wrath of the Lich King. Putting a ton of effort into developing raids that most of the playerbase never saw (Sunwell) was a waste of their time and they realized this. As a result, they changed raids to allow both smaller groups and to make them more accessable to "softcore" players. With EA writing Bioware's checks, I really don't think they'll be willing to finance the hiring of voice actors to voice content nor the time for the art teams to create long sequences that even a fair amount—not even a majority—of the playerbase won't see. Especially if new ME3 games that aren't supported by a ME2 save assumes, like in ME2, that you didn't go the extra mile for anything and, as a result, have most or all of the ME2 squad dead.

There are 11 squad members available to ME2 players without Kasumi and Zaeed. As many as 9 of those 11 can be dead for a player to still have a valid ME2 save to import to ME3. Which of those two are alive is almost chance. Let's look at them individually, shall we?

• Garrus Vakarian: could have died in the final mission. If alive, would definitely work with Shepard again.
• Grunt: could have died in the final mission. If alive, would probably work
  with Shepard again.
• Jack: could have died in the final mission. If alive,  there's a fair chance she wouldn't work with Shep again, even if he romanced her.
• Jacob Taylor: could have died in the final mission. If alive, would definitely work
  with Shepard again.
• Kasumi Goto: Could never even have been purchased (I won't be buying her DLC) and could have died in the final mission. If alive, probably wouldn't work
  with Shepard again.
• Legion: could have been given to Cerberus, could never have been activated, and could have died in the final mission. If alive, might work
  with Shepard again but might also return to the Geth.
• Miranda Lawson: could have died in the final mission. If alive, would probably work
  with Shepard again.
• Mordin Solus: easily dies in the final mission. Plus, he's old. If alive, would probably work
  with Shepard again.
• Morinth: easily not recruited and could have died in the final mission. If alive, almost certainly not work
  with Shepard again.
• Samara: could have died on her loyalty mission or in the final mission. If alive, might work
  with Shepard again, but seemed to indicate that she had other plans.
• Tali'Zorah vas Neema: could have died in the final mission. If alive, would definitely work
  with Shepard again.
• Thane Krios: could have died in the final mission. If alive at the end of ME2, might still have died before ME3 starts.
• Zaeed Massani: could never have been downloaded and could have died in the final mission. If alive, probably wouldn't work
  with Shepard again.

So let's just eliminate the ones with the greatest likelihood of not being around for ME3 for whatever reason. That leaves Garrus, Grunt, Jacob, Miranda, and Tali. If any characters from ME2 are given promenent roles in ME3, these are the most likely...

BUT let's not forget how Liara, Ashley, Kaidan, and Wrex were all sidelined for ME2. Four of the six ME1 characters! If ME2 wasn't out, we could be having this discussion right now about how we would never believe that Bioware would invalidate all our romance options (something said in this thread!), about how our saves are even being imported, and about how ME1 was sufficiently popular that they'd have a budget plenty large enough to support bringing all those characters back, especially the three who definitely lived. And yet...

So given past experience, I don't think I'm off base in saying that there is a good chance (no, not a guarantee) that few or none of the ME2 characters will be promenent in ME3. I'm not saying I like that or that I think it's a good decision, only that it seems all too likely given how ME2 went and given that all the characters now are in the same position that Kaidan, Ashley, and Wrex were in from ME1 to ME2.

[RobertM5252]

Unit-Alpha wrote...
That is EXACTLY what I want. If you fail, you deserve to have fewer people to help you. However, new players should not get several of the past teammates in order to make using an imprt a viable idea.

Yeah, but Bioware (and EA) are in the business of entertaining us not in teaching us lessons.

[RobertM5252]

Peppard wrote...

I do agree though, that the writers have the flexibility  to give any character a believable reason to leave, but also to stay.   

I'd be willing to bet Thane's dead in ME3 regardless of whether or not he survived the suicide mission. Samara, Morinth, Jack, Zaeed, Kasumi, and maybe even Mordin (sadly) all are likely candidates for, at best, cameos and "messages at our private terminals." As for the others... well, see my last post. There are sound financial reasons for EA to insist that Bioware not waste a lot of time and money with characters that could be dead.

In fact, I think this is sort of why we had no big group conferences in ME2. In ME1, you gather the crew around to talk about the mission a few times. In ME2, this only really happens consistently with Jacob and Miranda. Now, you could say that it's because they're the two Cerberus officers on the ship. Or you could note that Bioware can't be sure the other characters are present yet and thus didn't feel the need to write them lines since there's a chance they wouldn't even be recruited yet. Of course, I may be wrong here. After all, while it was easy to not have Liara yet before Illos in ME1, there was also a chance Wrex (and Garrus?) could have been skipped, which means only Kaidan, Ashley, and Tali were guaranteed to be at any ship conferences.

[David Knight]

Hmmm... all interesting theories. I tend to think that EA has screwed us over because it will most definitely want to appeal to a broader audience. The thing is, Bioware will likely screw themselves over if they anger all of us, the fans. The fans, the ones who have played the previous two games of the trilogy, are going to give them their money. The relatively few newcomers who are stupid enough to be a game that says Mass Effect ({[3]}) won't get them as much $ as the fans. If EA is intelligent at all they will allow Bioware to appeal to the fans. Garrus and Tali were brought back largely because they were fan favorites, and because the other ME1 characters are supposed to be alive in ME3. Really, with all the money made from ME2, Bioware and EA would have to be stupid to shoot themselves in the foot and start over with a new crew again.

That said, have a little faith. Bioware may surprise us. Hope for the best, plan for the worst.

[Peppard]

RobertM5252 wrote...They're not "paid by the hour," true, but if you think the number of lines they'll be performing has no bearing on their contract then I don't know what to tell you. I sincely doubt Alli Hillis (Liara) was paid as much for ME2 as ME1 nor as much as Liz Sroka (Tali), who likely got as much or more for ME2 as ME1.

They are generally paid for blocks of time for a session of a set time (maybe 4 hours?). There's a VA guild, much like for screen actors.  Some get "scale" the minimum union amount (like maybe Sroka), some probably get a premium for being more in demand (like maybe Stravhoski or some of the veteran VA types).

That means to a certain degree, the difference between a very short cameo and a slightly larger set of lines may not be that much, but would depend on whether they had to buy more than one session or what the minimum sessions they have to buy might be in the first place.

I do agree though that BW would be more concerned about creating content that appeals to the average fan, so as to make money.  What I do not know, for example, is how many average fans actually lost more than half the team.  Or if certain characters are statistically, b/c of plot armor, less likely to be killed than others (like say Grunt and Miri).  Any of them can die, it is true, but what are the odds for an average sort of player that a specific character died?   What if it turns out that say, 90% of players have Miranda alive.  Would it be worth it for BW to have that character return? Some say "oh no, they can't treat LI's unevenly, fan backlash.." but why were some harder to kill than others then?

[Brako Shepard]

They should get my wife to voice one of the Krogan females lol. She is mad about Wrex, and when ever I ask anything like 'Do you want a cup o' tea my love?', she will reply with a deep voiced 'Shepard' and a little yes nod lol.

[Eradyn]

RobertM5252 wrote...


Game developers cannot completely ignore the bottom line. Developing content that some of the playerbase may never even see is a waste of resources.

I really just want to address this one point.  Not to "pick" on you, but I've seen this argument several times and it needs to be laid to rest.

"According to Remedy, the developer of the upcoming Xbox 360 thriller Alan Wake, only 30% of players finish games they start. Some of that can be written off to being dissatisfied with the product, but most of those players
are perfectly happy with the game. They just didn’t bother completing it. Source"

That might be one game, but apparently it's a prevalent enough phenomenon to warrant several articles being written about it.  Taking this into account, perhaps game developers shouldn't bother designing in endings to their games? After all, it's just a waste of resources since only some of the player base will ever finish the game.

Ridiculous? I agree.  So is the notion that "only a fraction of the playerbase will see certain content, therefore it's a waste of resources."

Games don't work that way.  You can start up new playthroughs and explore as many paths as you would like.  If a player doesn't want to do that, fine, but the reality is that this content is not "magically" cut off from players.  You c replay a game, and doing otherwise should not penalize others.  To only focus on a narrow margin of possible variables is a great disservice to everyone else who chose different variables, and leads to the question of "who do we satisfy?" 

Modifié par Eradyn, 26 avril 2010 - 12:25 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

That explains where much of the ME 1 hate comes from. Arguably that game got much better at the end.



Not surprised by that statistic either. Would imagine that that number will increase as games become more user-friendly.

[Brako Shepard]

What I would like to hear from BioWare eventually, is who they intended to live or die for the best possible story for Mass Effect 3. Who lived, and who died and how etc.



Then it would be groovy to have another Mass Effect 2 save on how BioWare intended it.

[Darkhour]

Why make Legion's dialog and loyalty quest if it is possible that someone somewhere might conceivably have turned him over to Cerberus?

Whay make Grunt's dialog and loyalty quest if it is possible that someone somewhere might conceivably never have never released him from the cloning tank?

I'm not saying that the ME2 squad will carry over or not. Just that denying the majority of people based on the actions of a miniscule minority isn't a good plan. The vast majority of people, rather they have saves with everyone surviving or have certain people surviving in certain playthroughs, will witness all the content eventually.

Why make the suicide mission so not a suicide mission if the characters won't cross over? I'd have rather there been assignments that guarantee death so that X amount of people die no matter what if they aren;t going to carry over.

[Lucky Thirteen]

Look at it this way, Thane creates a time line. If he's only got a year to live, ME3 is probably going to take place within a year. I would think it would be really bad for the guys at Bioware to have spent all that time creating Thane, only for him to be dead in ME3.



Therefore, ME3 is probably going to take place immediately, at least a couple of months after ME2. It may be soon enough that no body has the chance to move off the Normandy before Shepard's onto the next mission. It would be easier if they have already set out the entire story for each of the characters in ME3 over the course of ME2, planning ahead, they just need to put the game together and get the actors in to finish some lines. I'm actually thinking creating a new cast will be more more work then using what they already have. That's essentially starting from scratch.

[jkflipflopDAO]

The export for an epic failed suicide mission is to have no export.



What is the default start for ME3? To not import a game.



Hence, the default story for ME3 is that Shep, and everyone on his crew except Joker and EDI are dead. Joker, Liara, and Ash/Kaiden are the only ones guaranteed to return.

[Rocket Weazle]

Jacob, Tali, Garrus, Miranda, Wrex, Liara, and Ash/Kaidan would be likely perhaps? Who knows, Bioware did some serious deconstruction of the importance of ME1 characters, so whos to say they wont do it again? Granted ME3 is all about CONSEQUENCES so maybe they will dedicate lots of time and money to stuff some people will never see.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Short answer: We don't know. There's just too many variables.



That being said, I like to think of BioWare as a promising developer and not the disappointing kind. In addition, I seem to recall reading somewhere that the ME1 squad mates (at least some of them) were intentionally made cameos in ME2 so that they don't die during the suicide mission, because they are meant to make a significant appearance in ME3. Ashley/Kaidan is an immediate example.

[ZombifiedJake]

There will most likely be cuts from the squad list as others have said. I think that Samara/Morinth, Kasumi, Zaeed, Jack will not be on the team. Jacob/Mordin will not be squadmates in combat and may have some supporting roles, same with Legion maybe.

I can see Miranda, Garrus, Tali, Grunt (probably replaces Wrex) and Thane appearing on the team, though they might kill off Thane too. Kaidan/Ashley might appear story wise but maybe not on the team. Liara will obviously be there but I don't think she'll be recruitable either.

Modifié par ZombifiedJake, 26 avril 2010 - 03:08 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Thane MUST be cured. He's too good a character to let die.

[rastakore]

I didn't see a point in the suicide mission, they only died if you didn't made their loyalty quests (and for those who want to play the full game will do it), didn't bother to upgrade the ship or deliberate send one of their squadmates to death. The only choice that was not obvious was who to send back to the ship, and on my first playtrough I got the Mordin killed, the rest was pretty obvious.
They should have taken the aproach of who do you send on the vents, lead the fire team, etc surely will die because someone should sacrifice themselfs for the sucess of the mission.
As for the ones returning for Mass Effect 3? I think all of them will be cameos with a some dialogue and the only ones I see returning are Garrus,Tali, Miranda and Jacob and I hope they keep Legion since he was made to interact to Sheppard. Even these ones, since they can die, I think will have a minimal impact and contribution in the story.
Thane will die, Mordin will die, Samara will continue her journey as a justicar, Grunt will join the Urdnot, Jack has gotten everything she wanted from Cerberus, Zaeed and Kasumi as they are DLC will not return.
I just hope with this Bioware will focus on the main plot and the threat of the reapers and who will tag along with you will be secondary, maybe we will have 2 or 3 new squadmates who will join you along the way, besides Liara and Kaiden/Ash.

Modifié par rastakore, 26 avril 2010 - 03:47 .

[Polka14]

kraidy1117 wrote...



You need two people alive to import your Shepard.

Liara and Ash/Kaidan and two people from ME2, Theres your squad and you get a bigger one if you have more people alive.

What if I do not want to take Liara back?

[RobertM5252]

Eradyn wrote...
I really just want to address this one point.  Not to "pick" on you, but I've seen this argument several times and it needs to be laid to rest.

"According to Remedy, the developer of the upcoming Xbox 360 thriller Alan Wake, only 30% of players finish games they start. Some of that can be written off to being dissatisfied with the product, but most of those players
are perfectly happy with the game. They just didn’t bother completing it. Source"

That might be one game, but apparently it's a prevalent enough phenomenon to warrant several articles being written about it.

No offense, but this is hardly an exhaustive survey of the entire gaming industry. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt that a large amount of video game players do not finish the games they buy/rent. But what you've sourced is not sufficient proof that 70% of all gamers do not finish any game. Call me skeptical, but of players who buy (not rent) games, I would imagine more than 30% finish them. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

Even if I am, the fact remains that of players who finish a game, not all of them will see all the content the game offers. It simply isn't logical to say that, since a large amount of gamers don't finish games they buy, all content is equally worth developing. Main storyline quests are worth devoting more resources to that side quests. Dialog that the player will definitely hear is worth devoting more resources to that dialog players might not (or probably won't) hear. Art resources to design and animate parts of the game that the play will see... You get my point.

Bioware doesn't have an unlimited amount of time (and money) with which to develop any game, including ME3. While I'm sure they'd love to be able to have every level as expansive as, say, Omega and for every NPC in the game to have something interesting to say, it's just not feasable. In an interview, I believe it was Jennifer Hale (FemShep) who mentioned that ME2 had a massive amount of lines of dialog. And the more permutations of the same scenario one adds, the more dialog there must be, nevermind the other developing resources that must be used for character interaction (e.g., "directing," lip-sync, etc.).

So... of players who will finish ME3, how many of them will have ME2 characters that died? Of ME3 players, how many of them will not even import ME2 games?

I maintain that there is a reason side-quests are simpler than the main quests. And there's a reason why Kaidan, Ashley, and Wrex in particular were reduced to cameo roles that had replacement characters for them should any of them be dead. Every single ME2 character is now in this situation because they can all be dead now, too. And given how hard it is to meet deadlines for developers, I just don't believe that Bioware will completely ignore that fact this time when they didn't last time.

[Lemonwizard]

RobertM5252 wrote...



Game developers cannot completely ignore the bottom line. Developing content that some of the playerbase may never even see is a waste of resources. It was a driving force for Blizzard when they developed World of Warcraft's latest expansion, Wrath of the Lich King. Putting a ton of effort into developing raids that most of the playerbase never saw (Sunwell) was a waste of their time and they realized this. As a result, they changed raids to allow both smaller groups and to make them more accessable to "softcore" players. With EA writing Bioware's checks, I really don't think they'll be willing to finance the hiring of voice actors to voice content nor the time for the art teams to create long sequences that even a fair amount—not even a majority—of the playerbase won't see. Especially if new ME3 games that aren't supported by a ME2 save assumes, like in ME2, that you didn't go the extra mile for anything and, as a result, have most or all of the ME2 squad dead.

The difference here, being, is that World of Warcraft is a monthly fee game and there's a very distinct incentive for Blizzard to keep people playing it as long as possible. Thus, new content which is not accessibly to most players doesn't keep most players playing. This is different from a non-MMO in that once somebody's bought the game to start, that's where all the money for the game has come from. Bioware/EA gets that same $50 whether I play the game 10 times to see all the possibly content or whether I never even beat it once.



As such, having a wide variety of content actually IS a solid business strategy, because it attracts a wider group of people to buy it in the first place. If Mordin is never seen by 20% of the players of ME3 because it's easy for him to die in the suicide mission, that doesn't actually lose them any money. If 5% more people buy the game because Mordin is hilarious and they loved having him along in ME2, that IS a clear benefit. They don't care if I stop playing the game after the first mission and don't see 99% of the content, they care that there's at least 1% in there somewhere that will convince me to buy the game.