2338 réponses à ce sujet

[snfonseka]

Luc0s wrote...

FlyinElk212 wrote...

I don't know--call me a hopeless optimist, but I just wish Bioware would stick to further developing their own characters instead of introducing new ones at the last minute. I feel as though new squadmates popping out of nowhere would seem like another cop-out: AHA! Here's Problem A in the plot of ME3? Well HERE'S A NEW GUY COMING OUT OF NOWHERE TO FIX IT! Where the crap was he in the first two games, who knows??

Okay I don't get this. Why do people always talk about ME3 as "last minute" We still have 1/3 of the whole Mass Effect story ahead of us, if not more! ME3 is definitely going to be the biggest and most impressive game in the Mass Effect trilogy. Some of you "optimists" act as if Mass Effect is almost over now, but I tell you what: It's only just starting! The end of ME2 was obviously the beginning of something much bigger.

That said, I think new squad members are very welcome in ME3. I would actually be pretty disappointed if there wouldn't be any new character (squad members) in ME3. Ofcourse it would be awesome if part of the ME1 squad would return in ME3 (Liara, Vermire survivor).  But the ME2 crew did it's part. They played their role. Their mission was the suicide mission. They're done now so they can go on with something else.

ME3 squad = Liara + Vermire survivor + new characters

I guess it's going to be like that and I hope it's going to be like that.

Not for me... because what I think is that both remaining ME1 and ME2 squad mates (not all of them, only the squad members who are important to the story -- Like Miranda, Legion, Mordin) should be there in ME3. I would be dissapointed to see only a new set of characters without having any from ME1 and ME2.

[snfonseka]

Luc0s wrote...

Well if you read my whole post you see that I actually hope to get Liara and VS back in my squad. But i could do without the ME2 squad. They're not needed to make ME3 awesome. Yes, I do love the ME2 squad, but their chapter is closed now the suicide mission is over.

Yea I know... but you droped the ME2 squad. Thats why I said that I need both ME1 and ME2.

[Zulu_DFA]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

The Geth/Quarian conflict and the Korgan genophage are not plot relevant. They will not be resolved in ME3. They are part of the world of Mass Effect and will remain fixtures beyond this initial trilogy.

Pretty much this.

Or, Quarian issues and Krogan issues were added to ME2 because of Tali and Wrex, not the other way around.

And you would know that,

Rubbish. I say "OR" signifying that I am not sure which. But I'm guessing both.

because you work for Bioware.

 
No, you work for BioWare. In fact, you must be Casey Hudson himself, seeing how well you know what his PRBS actually means, and how upset you are that we idiots don't get it straight.

See this is an example of falsification of facts.

 
I'd be glad to falsify some facts about ME3. My problem is, I don't have them.

At least I post sources to go with my claims,

 
Yeah, we know. Articles about ME2 and ME1 (some of them older than ME2 itself) that you claim to be about ME3.

these guys are posting their speculation as if it were announced by Bioware.

If it were announced by BioWare, there would be nothing to speculate about.

Extremely amusing.

Not nearly as amusing as see you failing at logic in every sentence. This is getting old though, fast.

-Polite

Whatever.


FYI: I'm all for the BIG CHOICES to matter and have actual consequences, but at this point I don't see it coming. In any case ME3 will be winnable regardless of the ME1&2 choices, so arguing that squadmates in ME2 are essential for the plot (save for Jacob, Miranda, Mordin and Legion [yeah, he is there to shut down some barrier at the Derelict Reaper] - and those solely for ME2 plot) is baseless. Surely the decisions you make during ME2 will have some continuity into ME3, but nothing of real importance.

[Yeti13]

nothing of real importance!!!!! WHAT? This is mass effect where talking about? Mine as well not have an importer at all and just make a whole new character in ME3, did u look at the loading screens at all in ME2?

[Sapienti]

Bluko wrote...


Glad to see someone else shares my general reasoning.

Each game is meant to be a standalone title. A.K.A. you don't have to play the previous game in order to play the next installment. If it was the other around the games would actually be more like expansions, which they are not. The game has to potentially play the same for everyone. Think about it. Say one person has only 5 potential squadmates and another person has 8 potential squadmates. That's terrible game design and Bioware knows it. Sure it may be great coming from a continuity point of view, but they aren't going to make a game where someone can have twice as many squadmates as someone else. It would just be unfair and you can bet there'd be critics who'd call them out on that.

That said I don't entirely understand why Bioware pretty much lets you kill your entire crew in ME2. Okay I do understand why, and that's to make the game more dramatic at the end, but they really dug themselves into a hole for ME3 this way. Also the other bad thing about in ME2 is you basically can choose who to die at certain parts of the final mission. Okay "yes" you were able to choose whether Ashley or Kaidan dies in ME1, but that choice was forced upon you. In ME2 assuming you know what you are doing you're never forced to choose whether to save someone or not. You can save everyone or alternatively kill everyone.

I just think the game would have had a little more meaning if there was a time or two you had to choose between who could live and die. Probably would have made making ME3 easier too so I don't get why Bioware didn't do more Ashley vs. Kaidan scenarios. But what's done is done.

This also brings up another point. Because it's a suicide mission and because anyone can die during it, it means simply your entire ME2 crew is expendable. And if they are meant to be expendable I can't see them playing major roles (like a squadmate would) in ME3.

I was going to quote so many people over the course of reading and skimming through this thread but arguments are going around in circles and people clearly have their minds made up and are just repeating themselves or stating their opinions repeatedly to different people. Basically I see pessimists taking one side and optimists the other and then of course the rest of the people who are actually open and able to freely go with one side or the other based on evidence and reasoning.

I'm of the opinion that Bioware already saw this coming from the get go and planned on what characters could/would be important NPCs and which would be potentially returning. All of which only really takes different dialogue. In ME2 whenever there was a meeting it was Mordin, Jacob and Miranda never any of the optional squad members. In ME3 they can just as easily do that for key scenes. Put in the bare bones squads for people who killed their whole squad on purpose, a team of 5 or 6 new characters of different classes and maybe 4 of them mandatory. Then they'd likely anticipate a few characters survival as potential squadmates and others as potential important NPCs. Its just hard to say who'd be what and why but bottom line is they can write and record as much dialogue as they can for every possible character appearance. Bring Jack with you on X mission and she has her one liner at whatever point. Or it could be new party member A. Or it could be Garrus etc.

Anyway, onto to Bluko, for starters, I seriously doubt Bioware would have a default file where everybody died. Anyone playing the game for the first time would likely have a few survivors left over from ME2 and not be completely alone. It was a suicide mission because it was supposed to be dramatic. You understand that. But it was not really suicide. They held your hand through it, you didn't exactly have to be a genius to figure out how to get through it with most of your squad alive. Therefore it was only really called suicide because it was dangerous and sounded more dangerous than "really dangerous mission". I think, if anything, the player should be rewarded for getting people out alive. Anyone who gets Garrus out alive should have some pull with the Turians in whatever role they play in the battle against the Reapers, same for Tali and the Quarians and even Legion with the Geth. Rather than look at it as "why punish people who didn't play" think more along the lines of "why not reward the people who did work".

You say an NPC cameo-esque role on the ship is good enough, I agree to a point, but you seem to think Squad members are important people. I don't know if you noticed, but in ME2 they weren't. Go do anyone's loyalty mission and the only squad member that matters was the person who's name was in the mission. The other hardly even mattered. Take it another direction, play through a story mission, you get one liners at best, generic roles for a member to play that can be done with any crew skeleton. The overlord DLC, its all Shepard. The only important Squad member is Shepard. The roles in the over all story hardly even matter. You could play through ME2 with just Jacob, Miranda and Mordin as your selectable squadmates and recruit every other character and they could be NPCs who implied they did things on missions and you'd get the same story outcome. Having them usable in your squad is really no different than an NPC until you get to dialogue, and that is all Bioware has to worry about. And that's why I don't think it matters if you think they were expendable or not they can still be very playable just depends on how much they want to invest in character dialogue. And seeing as how Mass Effect has gone from low budget success to greatness, dialogue is something they can handle regardless of variables. They can afford to pay for dialogue recording varibles.

And that is really the bottom line. Its not a fighting game, so balance doesn't matter for people carrying over surviving squad members. Make the mandatory team balanced and the rest would simply be icing. If people complain for not having as many characters as another guy, tell them to go play ME2. For ME3, the ME2 characters are already done, so 16+ characters really doesn't seem like a stretch at all, we don't need asymetricality in our pool of class choices for starters. Lastly, I think it would be cool if they had an additional mission in ME3 only doable if a certain character survived. They've got plenty of time and plenty of money, I think one of the biggest mistakes people are making is simply allowing their pessimism to make them underestimate what Bioware is capable of.

[MisterDyslexo]

Reasons for keeping/losing ME2 characters:
Zaeed: He's a merc; he got paid, his job's done, he says bye bye. If anything, he's most likely to be an enemy or just get in the way (especially if you let Vido go)
Legion: May come back, may get dissected for research, may get destroyed by a character (can't imagine Ashley would jump for joy at the sight of him/her/it/them)
Samara: Bound by oath (although the Code has to have a loophole somewhere, and if you go renegade on something, she may try to kill you)
Morinth:Might leave after she realizes you would mind**** her
Tali: A lot of variables for her, depends on choices
Mordin: Gets old, dies
Garrus: If he doesn't come back, then the Star Wars Christmas Special was the best tv program ever
Miranda: Maybe, considering she's obsessed with her (unless you sided with Jack)
Grunt: Has no reason to stay or go really
Jacob: He's lame, but there's no reason for him to disappear
Thane: Well he is terminally ill, so... nah he's too cool to die that way
Jack: Lots of variables (romance, siding with her or miranda, destroying the base)
Kasumi: She no reason to stay but plenty to go
Now ME1:
Wrex is on Tuchanka, and would prove far more useful as a tie to the krogan populace
Virmire Survivor: They're guaranteed to make a reappearance, and since they're just infantry, they can't have a huge role in any direct Reaper-conflicts
Virmire MIA: They're presumably dead. Unless they come back brought back as an abomination or indoctrinated for the purpose of emotionally manipulating Shepard, they're staying that way (although the VirmireSurvivor survived the seeker swarms, but whatever)
Liara: Until the Shadow Broker DLC comes out, there's no real way to tell. It could unfold in many ways, or just one, so its hard to tell.
Garrus & Tali: Mentioned earlier

Just my personal analysis, and as long as Bioware actually makes REAL consequences for the next one/plot that actually exists and isn't a game supported solely by whiny little crewmates with their problems, some of these should be correct

Modifié par MisterDyslexo, 12 août 2010 - 01:05 .

[Sharptooth]

People, BW has already confirmed that Mordin's age is relative to human years. In fact he's only about 30+ years Salarianly-speaking. Sure, he's in the twilight of his life, but age is not a reason for Mordin to not be present in ME3.

[Elyvern]

Why do people keep thinking that the time-table for the reapers' arrival must be within a year or two? Don't forget these are aliens that think of nothing of sleeping 50k years and repeating the process for several million more years.



Of course, needing Shepard to be the one to defeat them means the invasion has to happen within Shepard's lifetime, but it would still remain plausible even if ME3 takes place 10 years after ME2. WIth that kind of gap, ME2's squadmates are more likely to have gone their various ways, die off (Mordin & Thane) or moved up to better places (Tali), paving the way for a new squad.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Elyvern wrote...

Why do people keep thinking that the time-table for the reapers' arrival must be within a year or two? Don't forget these are aliens that think of nothing of sleeping 50k years and repeating the process for several million more years.

Of course, needing Shepard to be the one to defeat them means the invasion has to happen within Shepard's lifetime, but it would still remain plausible even if ME3 takes place 10 years after ME2. WIth that kind of gap, ME2's squadmates are more likely to have gone their various ways, die off (Mordin & Thane) or moved up to better places (Tali), paving the way for a new squad.

Any time they're doing DLC to bridge Mass 2 to Mass 3, I don't think it'd be the case. It will probably take place a few months, depending on the time table of the DLC. The DLC fills in the gap, so I doubt it will be 10 years DLC.

-Polite

[Elyvern]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Elyvern wrote...

Why do people keep thinking that the time-table for the reapers' arrival must be within a year or two? Don't forget these are aliens that think of nothing of sleeping 50k years and repeating the process for several million more years.

Of course, needing Shepard to be the one to defeat them means the invasion has to happen within Shepard's lifetime, but it would still remain plausible even if ME3 takes place 10 years after ME2. WIth that kind of gap, ME2's squadmates are more likely to have gone their various ways, die off (Mordin & Thane) or moved up to better places (Tali), paving the way for a new squad.

Any time they're doing DLC to bridge Mass 2 to Mass 3, I don't think it'd be the case. It will probably take place a few months, depending on the time table of the DLC. The DLC fills in the gap, so I doubt it will be 10 years DLC.

-Polite

It's still possibile to have DLCs bridge ME2 & 3. They can occur months after the suicide mission, but with long-term repercussions that will only surface years later. So it's still entirely possible for a several years to occur between ME2 and 3. You just face the consequences of those DLCs with a different team.

This isn't to say I'm advocating the several-year gap as my idea of how it will go. I'm just tossing in another possibility as to how we may end up losing the current ME2 squad in the third game.

[Pedrak]

Luc0s wrote...

Why does everyone call us pessimists? I'm not a pessimist, I'm a die hard optimist!
I'm highly optimistic about the idea of getting a new team in ME3 with Liara, VS and some new faces!

Agreed. As much as I like the old party members and I'm really looking forward to see them in relevant roles in ME3, I too would love to see new party members too. Think how many great characters we would have missed if they had decided to stick to the old team in ME2.

Modifié par Pedrak, 12 août 2010 - 04:13 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Elyvern wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Elyvern wrote...

Why do people keep thinking that the time-table for the reapers' arrival must be within a year or two? Don't forget these are aliens that think of nothing of sleeping 50k years and repeating the process for several million more years.

Of course, needing Shepard to be the one to defeat them means the invasion has to happen within Shepard's lifetime, but it would still remain plausible even if ME3 takes place 10 years after ME2. WIth that kind of gap, ME2's squadmates are more likely to have gone their various ways, die off (Mordin & Thane) or moved up to better places (Tali), paving the way for a new squad.

Any time they're doing DLC to bridge Mass 2 to Mass 3, I don't think it'd be the case. It will probably take place a few months, depending on the time table of the DLC. The DLC fills in the gap, so I doubt it will be 10 years DLC.

-Polite

It's still possibile to have DLCs bridge ME2 & 3. They can occur months after the suicide mission, but with long-term repercussions that will only surface years later. So it's still entirely possible for a several years to occur between ME2 and 3. You just face the consequences of those DLCs with a different team.

This isn't to say I'm advocating the several-year gap as my idea of how it will go. I'm just tossing in another possibility as to how we may end up losing the current ME2 squad in the third game.

If we were to lose some of the team, I could see the bridging DLC work out who leaves and who doesn't. But thats if we lose it. Again, theres no reason for most of them to go. The only ones who have reasons are Kasumi, Zaeed, and Samara probably. But Justicars are drawn to impossible causes, that was the suicide mission, and taking on the reapers is no easy task So she just might stay. But the others are definitely not leaving. So it's pretty much the DLC characters, because of their merc status, and the fact that they weren't full blown squad mates.

-Polite

[BirdieShepard]

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?
I don't think so.

Actually...

***SPOILER WARNING***

The success of the final mission is entirely dependant on crew survival. A Shepard who doesn't gain crew loyalty etc etc will kill most of his/her squad and will subsequently wind up dying themselves. I read on IGN that the makers of Bioware were not interested in allowing a player to 'continue' the trilogy if they killed off their Shepard (at this stage of development at least). This means that Bioware are putting a threshold, albeit poor, on the amount of squad deaths a player can have AND be able to send their save files across into ME3. So no, the potential to have all of your squadmates from ME1/2 (expect Liara) dead is almost nonexistant atm. Though it is fair to say that Bioware has set themselves a logistical nightmare here and perhaps it is easier, if not more illogical, to have ME3 with a clean slate of characters

***SPOILER END***

Bluko wrote...

"But everybody loves Garrus and Tali, how could they do this us?!"

It's Bioware's game and they do whatever the hell they want with it but... It's damn foolishness to not bring at least one of Garrus/Tali back! I'm talking purely though opinion here, but I, and many others I'm sure, like the idea of having at least one character in your ME3 squad who has been with your Shepard from the start. Also, there is a huge demand for G+T from the fans, something which developers shouldn't just ignore (this is true of any character).

We also have to remember that ME2 in centered around getting to know and gaining the trust of a new crew, something which I don't think Bioware will repeat for ME3. Sure, there will be new characters, but I doubt it will be as essential that you gain their loyalty. Even so, I don't think after forcing you to grow so attached to the ME2 squad Bioware are just going to toss them aside as though they couldn't possibly matter to you.

Personally speaking, I used to have a crazy theory that there would be two seperate squad loadouts following a big choice at the beginning of the game: One if you sidle with the Alliance, one if you sidle with Cerberus. Having finished the game since and ***SPOILER*** pissed off the Illusive Man ***SPOILER*** I don't think that this will happen . I now think some characters will leave (e.g. Samara due to the Code, Mordin because he's getting on in years, any DLC characters... etc) and others will stay and be joined by new members or old characters returning. If a character died they will be blacked out on the select squad screen and won't be avaliable. Simple. 

Of course, it's too early for anything to be definite.

Modifié par BirdieShepard, 12 août 2010 - 07:26 .

[SmokePants]

Luc0s wrote...

Why does everyone call us pessimists? I'm not a pessimist, I'm a die hard optimist!

It is absolutely absurd to be called a pessimist. It's like they don't comprehend that these characters have almost nothing to do with how good or bad ME3 will be. On the contrary, if Bioware tried to bring everyone back, it would likely result in disaster.

I mean, even Peter Molyneaux is too grounded in reality to entertain the ridiculous continuity-juggling "solutions" offered in this thread.

[smudboy]

SmokePants wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Why does everyone call us pessimists? I'm not a pessimist, I'm a die hard optimist!

It is absolutely absurd to be called a pessimist. It's like they don't comprehend that these characters have almost nothing to do with how good or bad ME3 will be. On the contrary, if Bioware tried to bring everyone back, it would likely result in disaster.

I mean, even Peter Molyneaux is too grounded in reality to entertain the ridiculous continuity-juggling "solutions" offered in this thread.

For simple, functional squadmates, it's not impossible.  It's actually basic, but definitely not the argument or what the "i want everybody back" crowd is believing.

I posted this in Zulu's thread, for how they could come back.  This is also based on decreasing complexity:
1) cameo
2a) plot driven cameo placeholders
2b) plot driven squadmates
3) placeholders
4) functional squadmate placeholders.

I can't see DLC working at all, unless it operates as a 5) character driven squadmate placeholder, which would be really weird if Tali died and we get a Tali DLC.

[Pulse-eater]

Luc0s wrote...

Pulse-eater wrote...

Clever idea, but wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to much work for BioWare. With this idea BioWare would at least need 4 disks to fit ME3 on.

If they were to bring back all of the ME2 characters it would be too much work. The intuition of most is that Bioware would not do so. If they bring back any it is likely (in my view) a new squad (possibly including VS and Liara) and no larger than the ME1 squad would joined by some ME2 survivors. Total squad possible should be no bigger than ME2 squad. The workload is similar. Any returning ME2 squadmates are essentially a bonus -- if the strategies I outlined were adopted, however, these returning characters should not feel cheapened.

One might also assume popular characters like Tali would surely warrant, minimally, a more extensive cameo than we have seen. So let her be a bonus squadmate (if alive) and then transition into her out-of-squad “cameo” role. Segregate her out-of-squad “cameo” role (which forms her purpose in the storyline) from her mostly gameplay role as a squadmate. So you do not have to create a duplicate squadmate. The additional work is therefore minimized. (The new squadmates are their own entities not placeholders.) Only her out-of-squad “cameo” role has a placeholder so no one misses the major content, and only the flavor of it (dialogue) and possible consequences are changed by her being dead.

Combine this with strategy 2 from my post for even better effect.

Modifié par Pulse-eater, 12 août 2010 - 06:14 .

[Iakus]

SmokePants wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Why does everyone call us pessimists? I'm not a pessimist, I'm a die hard optimist!

It is absolutely absurd to be called a pessimist. It's like they don't comprehend that these characters have almost nothing to do with how good or bad ME3 will be. On the contrary, if Bioware tried to bring everyone back, it would likely result in disaster.

I mean, even Peter Molyneaux is too grounded in reality to entertain the ridiculous continuity-juggling "solutions" offered in this thread.

"A pessimist is what an optimist calls a realist"

Ashley Williams

[epoch_]

Luc0s wrote...
 while in reality we actually are realists and they are just naive.

/thread

[MadInfiltrator]

The idea that all the squadmates will return is absolutely idiotic. But so is saying that iy is impossible for them to.



The third game will make it much easier to have divergent games, because the restrictions of having to connect it to the next game are gone. From ME1 to ME2, having Wrex was near impossible without completely changing someone's game. But in the third game, it would be possible because they do not have to keep people on an even playing field for the next game, and restrictions in programming associated with this problem are removed. So not only will it be possible to make a game where one person has Garrus and one doesn't, there will be resources available.



That said, it would be a pain for Bioware to do this for every surviving squadmate. So likely only a few will be recruitable. The rest will appear in the game though, unless they don't make sense. Bioware also needs space for new characters. And as attached as we all are to our team, don't forget, Bioware is always making better characters.



So the really important or popular guys will be back, and recruitable in a way similar to the second game. Being pretty optional. And the new characters will be recruitable in the story.

[epoch_]

MadInfiltrator wrote...

That said, it would be a pain for Bioware to do this for every surviving squadmate. So likely only a few will be recruitable.

And there it is.They're not going to bring back just some of the love interests and not the others. So either they all squad mates come back, non of them come back, all the non LI's come back, or just the LI's return. And there's the only 4 options.