2338 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

FlyinElk212 wrote...

Now I'm not saying that Bioware is incredible when it comes to storyline, but how and why would any of the survivors of ME2 just leave Shepard's side? Most notably, Miranda, Grunt, Garrus, & Tali? It would seem incredibly out of character for them to just leave Shepard, the main opposer of the Reaper threat.

The issue isn't "why they will leave" if alive, but that they can die.  And we all know how ME2 handles imported, dead characters.

A simple solution is a placeholder, either along a main plot point or elsewhere, that involves such and such a character, which may involve recruitment.  Thus, those characters may even be squadmates, but they won't be exhibiting the same attention and (potential) development ME2 characters have, a complex dialog wheel, a side and backstory, etc., which is the whole argument.  It would be fundamentally easier to simply create a new series of characters, learn about them with the plot, and have them develop independently (meaning, not as a placeholder).  Else, each placeholder (and we assume 12) is twice the work.

I've no doubt exploration and side stories would be involved, but quite marginally for the main plot to have any value (I've only seen side stories/missions done right in Alpha Protocol and Starcraft 2, so we can't expect that level of cohesion.)

If the argument is simply "they can be squadmates", but without any narrative value, then it becomes a pure argument on the function of game play, whereupon issues of balance, recruitment, role playing, and the sort, make them a mere shadow of their previous development.  BioWare's good at characters.  I would hate for them to screw them up, all for the sake of game play.

I reaaaally don't think you're giving Bioware enough credit. I just don't believe they're stupid enough to hype an entire game based off of the squad only to discard them for the next game. I think they're stupid enough to okay shoddy plotlines, but until they've proven to me they're absolutely beyond help, I just don't think they're stupid enough to do this.

They hyped up ME2, for ME2.  They'll do the same for ME3 for their own reasons and sales pitch.

Since we know there must be some resolution to the Shepard story, (whatever that means), we must focus on either 1) Shepard, 2) the plot.  If the ME3 side characters, who could be squadmates, are actual side characters, then they'd support Shepard in developing 1) and 2).  ME1 is a decent example.  The fact that the ME2 squad had nothing to do with ME2's plot, and the overarching plot, and suddenly will in ME3, when they can die/not be recruited/not be imported, is highly questionable.  Thus, the "placeholder in a plot point" seems likely.

Modifié par smudboy, 10 août 2010 - 09:51 .

[Wittand25]

FlyinElk212 wrote...
Now I'm not saying that Bioware is incredible when it comes to storyline, but how and why would any of the survivors of ME2 just leave Shepard's side? Most notably, Miranda, Grunt, Garrus, & Tali? It would seem incredibly out of character for them to just leave Shepard, the main opposer of the Reaper threat.

Those four:
Miranda does not strike me as someone who would be satisfied trailing along behind Shepard . She will keep in touch but she wont take orders for long, probably return to Cerberus and work as contact between Shepard and TIM.
Grunt was designed to be the salvation for the Krogan race, I fully expect that after the suicide mission he wants to return to Tuchanka and help rebuilding his race (could get interesting if both Wrex and Grunt survived)
Garrus already has experience in recruiting and leading a team, recruiting people for the fight against the reapers seems a good job for him.
Tali explains in ME2 that an exile can be revoked if the need should arise. With all the signs pointing to the fact that the Quarian/Geth conflict will result in war soon, the flotilla calling back the Quarian with the most experience fighting Geth seems not that far fetched.
It only takes a couple of minutes to come up with a plot for all the squadmates why they could leave Shepard and only appear as cameos in ME3.

[Yeti13]

i completely agree with the rational behind this thread but i don't believe it will happen quite like that, i think bioware will come up with a few more new squad mates but i truly believe that because the player has such an invested interest in these characters they will be your team for the next game. Bioware has to make a few new ones because most of your team can die and Shepard can still live but i think it will go like this:



If Shepard and whole team survive: 12 original me2 SM + possibly a member from ME1 + a couple of new ones



I believe to live thru the suicide mission you have to have at least two others survive with you, that means you can probably have around 6 SM in ME3 at the lowest or up to around 16



Yes it would be hard for BW to balance all these different outcomes but give them credit they are a fantastic company and i know they can pull it off. Like i said people care to much about these characters for them not to be SM in the next game if they lived, and BW can still add more new ones all the time via DLC and come on when Shep gets his/her shiny new dreadnought curtsey of the geth and quarians your going to have a lot of rooms to fill

[AllPyrosMustDieNow]

What I think they'll do is limit the number of berths on your ship for those who save everyone and their me1 squadmates they'll have no new ones but for those who get some or even all except two killed then they can recruit more. And you can't import a dead shepard it says so in the loading screens.

Modifié par AllPyrosMustDieNow, 10 août 2010 - 10:51 .

[FlyinElk212]

smudboy wrote...

The issue isn't "why they will leave" if alive, but that they can die.  And we all know how ME2 handles imported, dead characters.

A simple solution is a placeholder, either along a main plot point or elsewhere, that involves such and such a character, which may involve recruitment.  Thus, those characters may even be squadmates, but they won't be exhibiting the same attention and (potential) development ME2 characters have, a complex dialog wheel, a side and backstory, etc., which is the whole argument.  It would be fundamentally easier to simply create a new series of characters, learn about them with the plot, and have them develop independently (meaning, not as a placeholder).  Else, each placeholder (and we assume 12) is twice the work.
...
BioWare's good at characters.  I would hate for them to screw them up, all for the sake of game play.

I completely agree that Bioware rocks at characters, and while having replacement switch characters for each of the 12 squadmates would absolutely be way too much work and disc space, and that placeholders is an easy option, I believe that a better alternative exists.

Going into ME3, every player MUST have at least 4 squaddies still alive within their game: Liara, Ash/Kaidan, and the two ME2 survivors necessary for Shepard to live. Who's to say that Bioware couldn't make that the minimum squad, with each surviving ME2 squadmate filling up the rest? 

Instead of having alternative dialogue for a replacement character, the characters who survived the suicide mission in ME2 could simply provide additional content and squadmate options that don't get unlocked if they died. Say Tali died in your suicide mission. Because of that, when you go to recruit the Quarians in the fight against the Reapers, you'll have a much more difficult time. Tali surviving, however, provides additional dialogue and scenarios in gaining the Quarians allegiance. Maybe her survival makes it easier, or even better, makes gaining the Quarian's allegiance possible in the first place (but defeating the Reapers doesn't require the Quarians assistance--it just makes it easier).

And that's just one example. Simply put, I do not believe that "replacement characters" would be needed to advance the plot. Instead, characters who are alive from ME2 can provide additional content that facilitates situations in ME3. That way, they can still seem integral to the story while not being completely necessary.

smudboy wrote...

They hyped up ME2, for ME2.  They'll do the same for ME3 for their own reasons and sales pitch.

Since we know there must be some resolution to the Shepard story, (whatever that means), we must focus on either 1) Shepard, 2) the plot.  If the ME3 side characters, who could be squadmates, are actual side characters, then they'd support Shepard in developing 1) and 2).  ME1 is a decent example.  The fact that the ME2 squad had nothing to do with ME2's plot, and the overarching plot, and suddenly will in ME3, when they can die/not be recruited/not be imported, is highly questionable.  Thus, the "placeholder in a plot point" seems likely.

I'm so on page with you about the sales pitch for ME3. Yet I still believe that Bioware has created too many coincidences from a game developing standpoint for them not to include ME2 squadmates. Why do 2 squaddies HAVE to be alive universally? How many squaddies does it take to make a full ground team? Then, if we consider the ME2 squaddies and disregard DLC chars, how many total squadmates could ME3 have (12, the same number as ME2's squad)? And finally, how simple would it be to just have those squaddies provide additional, but supplementary content that can't be accessed if they died in ME2? There's no need for new characters in this already jumbled plot.

Wittand25 wrote...

Miranda does not strike me as someone who would be satisfied trailing along behind Shepard . She will keep in
touch but she wont take orders for long, probably return to Cerberus andwork as contact between Shepard and TIM.
Grunt was designed to be the salvation for the Krogan race, I fully expect that after the suicide mission he wants to return to Tuchanka and help rebuilding his race (could get interesting if both Wrex and Grunt survived)
Garrus already has experience in recruiting and leading a team, recruiting people for the fight against the reapers seems a good job for him.
Tali explains in ME2 that an exile can be revoked if the need should arise. With all the signs pointing to the fact that the Quarian/Geth conflict will result in war soon, the flotilla calling back the Quarian with the most experience fighting Geth seems not that far fetched.

It only takes a couple of minutes to come up with a plot for all the squadmates why they could leave Shepard and only appear as cameos in ME3.

And yet, I could just as easily come up with reasons as for why these characters should stay as squaddies:

Miranda- Just quit Cerberus. Just revealed to finally believe in Commander Shepard after her loyalty mission. Has always thought that the ultimate goal was to protect humanity for the Reapers. Views Shepard as their best shot (stated in ME2)
Grunt- Views Shepard as his battlemaster. States Shepard has no equal. Will follow Shepard as long as he continues to produce powerful enemies.
Garrus- Already believes he's failed as a leader. Believes in Shepard. Has no need to accumulate a team to fight the Reapers: Shepard has done so already. Has nowhere else to go.
Tali- Understands that the Reapers are the true threat. Considers Shepard one of her most trusted people. Just recently had to work with a Geth. Knows that neither her people nor the Geth will have a home to live on if the Reapers win and wipe out existence.

See? That was just as easy. Simply because the characters have easy outs doesn't mean it explains their motivations for doing so--in most cases, it just doesn't make sense for their characters. And, as I've stated before, when you've got easy ways to include the ME2 squad in ME3, why not take it? Why add more characters and convalute the story further?

Modifié par FlyinElk212, 10 août 2010 - 11:35 .

[Yeti13]

Also forgot to add this in my post, the thing about bioware making more money by advertising different i believe to be false, Mass effect is a trilogy they want you to go back and buy the first two games, they make more money that way. If ME3 could be completely stand alone where no squad mates carry over it would be hard to say "hey you need to play ME1 and ME2 in order to fully enjoy the experience that is Mass Effect" If the Squad mates carry over then people who never played Me1 and Me2 will want to go back and make sure that they form connections with those characters and make sure they survive. thats what makes the fact that it's your story so important, thats why there will always be characters u love, hate or love to hate. theres a reason ME1 is still IGN.com's number one 360 game. The next game will be about defeating the reapers anyway you can not building relationships with a whole new crew

[FedericoV]

While I agree that the majority of ME3 charachter will be new and for a good reason and even if I understand the logic behind the arguments against the return of ME2 squad, I still think that there is some workable middle ground in between that can please the large majority of the old fanbase and do not harm newcomers of the franchise. At the end if BW estabilish that the canon is the survival of (let's say) 4 old charachters in the suicidal mission and give us the chance to recruit 2 optional new charachters during the story at their place (plus 6 standard new charachters) I would not see any problem.

The new players would not miss anything. The old players would miss a couple of charachters at most but the continuity of the story of their Shepard and their choices during the previous games would be awarded. I saved everyone during the so called suicidal mission, but even if some member of my squad would be dead I would not be upset. For me it's not a problem of attachment to old charachters. Only, some members of the old ME2 squad had still so much to tell (Legion and Miranda above all).

[CleverCover]

Reading the first page just killed some hopes and dreams.
Maybe waiting for reviews for the third game isn't such a bad idea anymore...

Edit: You know what. Forget it. All this speculation and worrying and "OMG I WON'T GET TO SEE THIS CHARACTER" or "OMG THAT IDEA IS STOOPID" is not worth it. I'll just wait until the first trailer. This is just giving me an ulcer.

I'll leave the decision in Bioware's capable hands. They haven't completely let me down before, so I should have some faith in them that no matter what, it will be a game I can enjoy. If not, well I can always just return it and get my money back.

Modifié par CleverCover, 11 août 2010 - 05:25 .

[xlavaina]

There is a 90% chance that I will not buy ME3 if Garrus and Tali are not available as squadmembers. Here's why. For me they have become, in essence, the reason I play Mass Effect. They are the two most badass characters in the game. Tali has the most interesting backstory and Garrus has the most interesting loyalty mission. They go everywhere with me. There's just no way I could bear ME3 without them. I would feel betrayed if Bioware took them out. Garrus and Tali top all the favorites charts, and for Bioware to take them out would undoubtedly cause a massive ****storm on every forum ever created for video games. It just wouldn't make sense for BW to not include them.

[Wittand25]

FlyinElk212 wrote...
And yet, I could just as easily come up with reasons as for why these characters should stay as squaddies:

Miranda- Just quit Cerberus. Just revealed to finally believe in Commander Shepard after her loyalty mission. Has always thought that the ultimate goal was to protect humanity for the Reapers. Views Shepard as their best shot (stated in ME2)
Grunt- Views Shepard as his battlemaster. States Shepard has no equal. Will follow Shepard as long as he continues to produce powerful enemies.
Garrus- Already believes he's failed as a leader. Believes in Shepard. Has no need to accumulate a team to fight the Reapers: Shepard has done so already. Has nowhere else to go.
Tali- Understands that the Reapers are the true threat. Considers Shepard one of her most trusted people. Just recently had to work with a Geth. Knows that neither her people nor the Geth will have a home to live on if the Reapers win and wipe out existence.

See? That was just as easy. Simply because the characters have easy outs doesn't mean it explains their motivations for doing so--in most cases, it just doesn't make sense for their characters. And, as I've stated before, when you've got easy ways to include the ME2 squad in ME3, why not take it? Why add more characters and convalute the story further?

You forgot that in the case they remain squaddies you need more than a reason to stay, you need dialog and interaction with them beyond " the reapers are a threat". The scenerios I mentioned give them some meaningful things to say to Shepard when they meet again, if they remain at Shepard´s side the whole time there is very few intresting things that they can possible have to talk about,you should have resolved their personal issues in ME2 and because they stayed with Shepard they never could expierience anything new worth talking about. Unless you are ok with "Later Shepard, I have to stare at the wall now" as response everytime you try to talk with an NPC this would present quite a problem for the writers.

Modifié par Wittand25, 11 août 2010 - 06:18 .

[Pedrak]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

The whole issue with your argument is that you claiming the mass 2 team will get cameos based on what happened to the mass 1 team. But you don't understand the reason the mass 1 team got sidelined for mass 2. Once you understand that, and the fact that Ashley/Kaidan could potentially die, like the mass 2 squad, you'd understand how Bioware will handle it. They already got Wrex, Ashley/Kaidan into the games of anyone who had them survive, all they had to do was give them a larger role. That's exactly what they're going to do in Mass 3, with the virmire survivor, and with the surviving mass effect 2 team. The only squaddies from mass 2 who will most likely not be in the game will be Zaeed and Kasumi. Only those two. Everyone else but Thane has credible reasons to be on the Normandy.

So, Polite, what you say is basically "The only reason for the cameos in ME2 was to sideline those characters for ME3, to keep them away from the suicide mission and alive for the next game; THEREFORE in Mass Effect 3 there won't be cameos ".

The fact is, there could be another reasons for cameos in ME3: showing old characters, throwing players a bone, proving them that their choices mattered and "rewarding" them for having kept a character alive, WITHOUT having to write them all in the party, which, as has been noted, would be a logistical nightmare - writing and voicing all these characters *plus* a place-holder for each one of them?.

A cameo seeks to find the balance between jettisoning a character altogether and having to write him/her in the party: you still get to see him/her, perhaps in a plot-relevant role (I actually liked what they did to Wrex), but they are not forced to pull off the unfeasible task of preparing a party featuring Garrus OR his place-holder; Tali OR her stunt-double; Miranda OR her replacement; Jack OR her doppelganger; etc.

As I said, my guess is that at least Garrus and Tali (fan favourites) and Miranda (who was very tough to kill in the suicide mission, possibly because of her role in ME3?) will be relevant NPCs and have a role similar to Wrex' or maybe larger; Samara will also probably be a quest giver; others will have minor appearances (Jack?) or we'll just get quick goodbye mails from them (ex. I certainly don't expect more from Kasumi). Others will be just gone (Thane, who has the best reason not to be there, although I hope he'll get at least a mention, and Zaeed, who doesn't strike me as a sentimental guy who would stick around when his task is done or would bother with postcards).

Modifié par Pedrak, 11 août 2010 - 09:08 .

[sHePhArD44]

Well, because Bioware knows the connections people have with each character in the Mass Effect games (they all have fanbases), I'm sure they will keep at the very least some of your Mass Effect 2 squad-mates; could you imagine the outcry if characters like Garrus or Tali were dropped?



Also, if Garrus wasn't a squad-member in Mass Effect 3, I would go up to the Bioware building(s) and burn it to the ground! (jokes)

[Pedrak]

sHePhArD44 wrote...

Well, because Bioware knows the connections people have with each character in the Mass Effect games (they all have fanbases), I'm sure they will keep at the very least some of your Mass Effect 2 squad-mates; could you imagine the outcry if characters like Garrus or Tali were dropped?

Well, speaking for myself, I wouldn't mind them not being party members as long as they'll be in the game with an important role and a relevant relationship with Shepard. Simply writing them off would be a spectacularly bad move, but they'll obviously won't do that.

Modifié par Pedrak, 11 août 2010 - 09:06 .

[JohnnyBeGood2]

Bluko wrote...
The fact of the matter is every squadmate from ME1 and ME2 can potentially be dead except for Liara. Do you really think Bioware is going to make a game with 16+ characters or something?

Working in software, the hardest parts are writing new code, not reiterating instances of what already exists. If they use the core of the ME2 engine then 16+ characters is much less of a statment than you make it sound (pity the devs though who have to script it x 16)

Trying to add all the old characters or even some of them as squadmates would just be a variable nightmare.

That's called intelligent Software Development and BW haved staked themselves on that reputation... true?

There is no way Bioware could make a balanced game around mostly squadmates who may or may not be dead for your Shepard in ME3.

I think that's their intention.

It's for this reason I believe every squadmate you have in ME3 will likely be a new character.

There really isn't the evidence to support this at all. BW have made it clear they want your decisions to matter. Hard for our decisions to matter, if BW's decision don't. ME2 hit the ball park of sales they expected and they prepared to continue into ME3 with the overall objective of making decisions count.

Casey Hudson himself even elluded in an interview awhile back how it's fun/interesting to meet new characters. I think this basically makes it clear almost all the squadmates in ME3 will be new.

wow op, your logic there is truly appalling. Truly. Apalling.

[Pedrak]

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

Bluko wrote...
The fact of the matter is every squadmate from ME1 and ME2 can potentially be dead except for Liara. Do you really think Bioware is going to make a game with 16+ characters or something?

Working in software, the hardest parts are writing new code, not reiterating instances of what already exists. If they use the core of the ME2 engine then 16+ characters is much less of a statment than you make it sound (pity the devs though who have to script it x 16)

Writing the dialogues and adding the voice acting for 16+ different party members (and Shepard, who has to interact with each one of them in a different, unique way) sounds like a truly herculean task though. Unless we are talking about Kasumi or Zaaed-like levels of interactions here.

Modifié par Pedrak, 11 août 2010 - 10:02 .

[snfonseka]

Pedrak wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

Bluko wrote...
The fact of the matter is every squadmate from ME1 and ME2 can potentially be dead except for Liara. Do you really think Bioware is going to make a game with 16+ characters or something?

Working in software, the hardest parts are writing new code, not reiterating instances of what already exists. If they use the core of the ME2 engine then 16+ characters is much less of a statment than you make it sound (pity the devs though who have to script it x 16)

Writing the dialogues and adding the voice acting for 16+ different party members (and Shepard, who has to interact with each one of them in a different, unique way) sounds like a truly herculean task though. Unless we are talking about Kasumi or Zaaed-like levels of interactions here.

I personally don't think that BW will give us 16+ characters. My estimation is 12 max. But what JohnnyBeGood2 has mentioned about "writing the new code" is correct.

[I_am_a_Spoon]

I reckon that Bioware will go down the "safe" route. They'll create 'templates' for each of the possible characters (those who participated in the suicide mission, Ashley/Kaidan, Wrex, and possibly crewmembers and/or unimportant NPCs if they have time); each character (if alive) will play a non-essential (but beneficial) role in the events that unfold throughout ME3, either as a squadmate or as a recurring character. Dead characters won't appear, or will be commemorated during a memorial service or something, just to send them off and provide closure.

If Shepard finds himself/herself with only a handful of squadmembers after a disastrous finale to ME2, then it's possible that:

a) The player will be disadvantaged from the start, penalised for their lack of involvement and poor leadership during the suicide mission and the events preceding it.
Bioware will allow the player to recruit mercenaries or Cerberus/Alliance/whatever soldiers (depending on where Shepard's loyalties lie) as 'filler' squadmembers. This option both levels the playing field and penalises players who have let their team die (as they'll be forced to work alongside normal troops rather than interesting characters, and won't have the same romance/squadmate development options as players who managed to retain most or all of their team).
c) Bioware will create a new batch of recruitable replacement characters. This is both a harder task than that presented by 'option b', and to be honest, an outcome that doesn't penalise careless ME2 players enough. Not to mention the probablility that the storyline will suffer as a result of this increased workload (and the diversion that it presents).

Modifié par I_am_a_Spoon, 11 août 2010 - 11:03 .

[Super ._. Shepard]

what happens if all you crew died lol including shepard

[I_am_a_Spoon]

Super ._. Shepard wrote...

what happens if all you crew died lol including shepard

I guess you'll have to go with the "vanilla" Bioware plotline.

Modifié par I_am_a_Spoon, 11 août 2010 - 11:05 .

[smudboy]

FlyinElk212 wrote...
I completely agree that Bioware rocks at characters, and while having replacement switch characters for each of the 12 squadmates would absolutely be way too much work and disc space, and that placeholders is an easy option, I believe that a better alternative exists.

Going into ME3, every player MUST have at least 4 squaddies still alive within their game: Liara, Ash/Kaidan, and the two ME2 survivors necessary for Shepard to live. Who's to say that Bioware couldn't make that the minimum squad, with each surviving ME2 squadmate filling up the rest?

Because you stated that it's way too much work?  Unless they're just there for basic introductions, and to start exploring.  They wouldn't be full fledged squadmates (complete dialog wheels, backstories, etc.), which isn't the argument.

Instead of having alternative dialogue for a replacement character, the characters who survived the suicide mission in ME2 could simply provide additional content and squadmate options that don't get unlocked if they died. Say Tali died in your suicide mission. Because of that, when you go to recruit the Quarians in the fight against the Reapers, you'll have a much more difficult time. Tali surviving, however, provides additional dialogue and scenarios in gaining the Quarians allegiance. Maybe her survival makes it easier, or even better, makes gaining the Quarian's allegiance possible in the first place (but defeating the Reapers doesn't require the Quarians assistance--it just makes it easier).

Yes.  This is an example of what we're arguing.  Cameo placeholders.

And that's just one example. Simply put, I do not believe that "replacement characters" would be needed to advance the plot. Instead, characters who are alive from ME2 can provide additional content that facilitates situations in ME3. That way, they can still seem integral to the story while not being completely necessary.

Characters are not necessary to advance a plot.  To make the characters relevant however, it would be helpful to the story and their involvement in it, else they once again become fluff.  The issue is the placeholder character, which doesn't make the character integral, but makes the placeholder integral.  Thus, the characters, if treated as placeholders, would be plot relevant.

(This, coming from a previous chapter, where characters were plot irrelevant.)

I'm so on page with you about the sales pitch for ME3. Yet I still believe that Bioware has created too many coincidences from a game developing standpoint for them not to include ME2 squadmates. Why do 2 squaddies HAVE to be alive universally? How many squaddies does it take to make a full ground team? Then, if we consider the ME2 squaddies and disregard DLC chars, how many total squadmates could ME3 have (12, the same number as ME2's squad)? And finally, how simple would it be to just have those squaddies provide additional, but supplementary content that can't be accessed if they died in ME2? There's no need for new characters in this already jumbled plot.

We're not saying they won't be in ME3 if they survive.  We're saying they won't be fully fledged squadmates.

If they'll simply be there just to be a squadmate, then sure, that's no big deal.  They'll just have no depth to what we're accustomed to, which is not what ME characters are known for.  I can't see that happening, but it's the easy way out.

Two of the reasons that there will be new squadmates is 1) it's easier and simpler to accomplish, considering everything we're discussing 2) Casey said so.

[glacier1701]

I'll point out once again for those of you saying that we MUST have the ME2 squaddies back that there are 1096 different combinations of the way that squad could look. If you want them back then something HAS to be cut out. The easiest thing to do is to NOT put in party banter and interaction between the squad members which is exactly what we got in ME2. As far as I can see most of us did not like that. However those arguing for the return of the entire ME2 squad are advocating that that be the norm for ME3 even if it is not their intention. If, somehow, BioWare did get in all the banter something HAS to be cut to make room within the time/budget restraints that they have. What are YOU willing to give up for that? Weapon choices? Armour choices? A non-linear plot? Face it something has to be left out if we have an entire ME2 return and considering that that means we'd get pretty much the same as we got in ME2 for ME3 I personally am not in favour of seeing the same again.