2338 réponses à ce sujet

[epoch_]

SmokePants wrote...

Yeti13 wrote...

epoch_ wrote...

This thread is incredibly entertaining.

Quite entertaining, It's going to be fun when me3 comes out and BW shocks us all^_^

Not really. This is all just the same ****, different game,
different year. There's never any grand resolution. Slowly, the people with their head in the clouds, dreaming dreams come to realize they were wrong and stop posting well in advance of the game's release. They will blame Bioware for not executing their deluded plans rather than admit their plans were delusional. They'll  get angry, curse the developer, and swear off the game forever like the children they are.

The reason I know I'm on the correct side is because I won't get upset if I'm completely wrong. If Bioware can overcome the many, many hurdles to bring back the squadmates as squadmates, without compromising the quality of the game, I would be ecstatic. No one can accuse me of seeing only what I want to see. That's what separates an objective point of view from a biased one.

haha, I know. It's a wonderful position to be in. I really, really hope I'm wrong.

Situation A: None of the squad mates return.
My reation: none, I'm not disappointed at all. I wasn't expecting anything more.

Situation B: The squad mates return and are done in a manner doing them all justice.
My reaction: Ecstatic. They have exceeded my expectations. I couldn't be happier.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Luc0s wrote...
Which is EXACTLY why I believe the ME2 squad is expendable and won't return in your ME3 squad, because they CAN die unlike Ash/Kaiden and Liara who where cameos in ME2 so they COULDN'T die in that game so BioWare can easily write them into the ME3 story and/or make them part of your ME3 squad.

You don't realize that with this you're actually shooting yourself in the foot. This concept of why Ash/Kaiden and Liara where cameos in ME2 (so they couldn't die, while your entire ME2 squad could) weakens your argument, but makes mine stronger.

How exactly am I shooting myself in the foot? Just because they want to make it where certain characters from the first game make it into the 3rd doesn't mean anything. It just means that they didn't want to design possibly dead or alive characters for Ashley/Kaidan/Wrex/Liara. Its funny because it really doesn't strengthen your argument at all.  Kaidan/Ashley could both die in the first game. They didn't want them to have a second chance of dying in the second game. So they were given cameos to make sure someone doesn't kill the survivor this time around. That's the only reason they were left out. Because both could already die in the first game. 

In the second game, everyone can die. But not everyone does. It's the exact same thing, only instead of choosing one over the other, you have your entire team who can possibly die. So again, this doesn't strengthen your argument at all. 

-Polite

[glacier1701]

Polite,

 You do seem to argue that the work done in ME2 means that the squad must be in ME3. That to do otherwise is a waste of time. Yet so far as i can see there are 1096 different squads that could result from what happens in ME2. Do you really think that BioWare can handle that many different variations in the squad? I am not sure they can do that and provide a decent game. Oh I am not saying that the gameplay shooting side will suffer but everything else will and that is what the critisism is about. That fact that we got a shooter that was supposed to be heavy on RPG but turned out to RPG lite at best.

 Perhaps more to the point is that for a game that was supposed to appeal to a much wider demographic it hasnt sold so much more than ME1 did which means that it failed to do what they wanted it to do. They may be happy with the figures but certainly it is not the success that it could have been had they NOT cut out everything that didnt work well in ME1 and not replace it in ME2 because of a NO RPG rule they had in place for much of the development. And yet we are to trust that the mistakes made have been learnt from when so much of what we hear from Casey seems to indicate that nothing has been learned from those mistakes. I am not holding out for a substantive change in ME3 which is a shame since ME promised a lot but doesnt seem to be able to get past someone's ego.

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
Which is EXACTLY why I believe the ME2 squad is expendable and won't return in your ME3 squad, because they CAN die unlike Ash/Kaiden and Liara who where cameos in ME2 so they COULDN'T die in that game so BioWare can easily write them into the ME3 story and/or make them part of your ME3 squad.

You don't realize that with this you're actually shooting yourself in the foot. This concept of why Ash/Kaiden and Liara where cameos in ME2 (so they couldn't die, while your entire ME2 squad could) weakens your argument, but makes mine stronger.

How exactly am I shooting myself in the foot? Just because they want to make it where certain characters from the first game make it into the 3rd doesn't mean anything. It just means that they didn't want to design possibly dead or alive characters for Ashley/Kaidan/Wrex/Liara. Its funny because it really doesn't strengthen your argument at all.  Kaidan/Ashley could both die in the first game. They didn't want them to have a second chance of dying in the second game. So they were given cameos to make sure someone doesn't kill the survivor this time around. That's the only reason they were left out. Because both could already die in the first game. 

In the second game, everyone can die. But not everyone does. It's the exact same thing, only instead of choosing one over the other, you have your entire team who can possibly die. So again, this doesn't strengthen your argument at all. 

-Polite

So you think the binary placeholder for Ash/Kaidan, works the same way the 2 random squadmate placeholders will work for ME3?  What if they're Zaeed and Kasumi?  They'll be what, then, exaclty?

You're making a false statement  You're saying "that's the only reason they were left out."  How?  Where are you even getting this?  What does having a cameo placeholder have to do with them having the only reason to be left out of ME2 as a squadmate?  Please explain this, because I cannot even begin to understand how you came to this deduction.  And do not simply repeat yourself.  There can be multiple reasons for having cameos for Ash/Kaidan, or Wrex, or Liara, yet still making them a cameo placeholder.

You see, your argument is made weaker, by you defining Ash/Kaidan as being cameo placeholders in ME2, and then saying the same thing will have to the two survivors in ME3.  Yet you believe they'll all be back as fully fledged squadmates.  So which one is it?  Two random surviving squadmates in ME2 will become placeholders, or everyone in ME3 will be fully fledged squadmates?  Or maybe only the two will be cameo placeholders, and the rest, fully fledged squadmates?  Again, what are you trying to say?

[snfonseka]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

snfonseka wrote...

McBeath wrote...

Casey Hudson has even admitted that they use data collected when we log online to make decisions like this. For example, if nobody completed a certain quest I bet we'll see an email in ME3, nothing more. But if everybody completes it in all thier playthroughts it's likely to be mentioned. The writers use this info to decide what avenues the side stories take. Same with characters. If everybody keeps Tali then she'll be in ME3. Same with Lawson(they may have a contract with her voice actor, so that may indeed guarentee her in 3).

People seem to forget that BIOWARE is a company, and there first priority is to turn a profit.

So, if 95% of the customer base wants to see the "whole team back", and only 5% want to get new characters(or 95% had a full survival playthrough/5% killed crew) who do you think they'll cater too? It's pretty simple business to me.

If people don't get that concept then I truly hope that they never become CEO's of the companies that I hold stocks in...

^This

90% of people want smaller and more interactive squad.

Yea me too... but that does not says 90% of people want squard members with new faces... does it? let BW desides who are the important characters of ME2 (I have my own list)...

The point is.... THE POLL DOES NOT REPRESENT ANYTHING ABOUT BRINGING THE OLD ME2 SQUARD...
If you want to know the gamers ideas about it start another poll for it.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

That
said, I do think, that some ME2 squadmates will be recruitable (Garrus
and Tali probably). But not in the default scenario and they will not be
on the ME3 disk. They will be Zaeed-like DLC. Included exclusively in
the Collector's Edition. ../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png

I suspect that would do more to tick people off than to appease them.

When they already buy the game it won't matter.

I am glad that "Zulu" is not the CEO of EA / BW .

Modifié par snfonseka, 14 août 2010 - 02:04 .

[JohnnyBeGood2]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
90% of people want smaller and more interactive squad.

Zulu. Just. No.

That poll shows that people want less SQUADMATES (AVAILABLE SQUADMATES?) and more interaction.
NOT, a smaller squad and more interaction.

C'mon.

Modifié par JohnnyBeGood2, 14 août 2010 - 02:14 .

[snfonseka]

implodinggoat wrote...

epoch_ wrote...
whatever helps you sleep at night.

Dude, now you're just being an ass.  If you don't have a rebuttle than just keep your trap shut.  Belittling my comments without a logical justification to back you up doesn't help your argument.  It just makes you seem like an ass.

^This. Its very annoying when adults start to act like 12 year old teens in a forum discussion.
Also either we have to give a logical justification or if that is a speculation, we have to mention that in our comments rather than writing them in a such a way that readers get the idea of that those speculations are facts...

Modifié par snfonseka, 14 août 2010 - 02:15 .

[xlavaina]

glacier1701 wrote...

Polite,

 You do seem to argue that the work done in ME2 means that the squad must be in ME3. That to do otherwise is a waste of time. Yet so far as i can see there are 1096 different squads that could result from what happens in ME2. Do you really think that BioWare can handle that many different variations in the squad? I am not sure they can do that and provide a decent game. Oh I am not saying that the gameplay shooting side will suffer but everything else will and that is what the critisism is about. That fact that we got a shooter that was supposed to be heavy on RPG but turned out to RPG lite at best.

I agree with this to some extent. However, I disagree in the following ways: First, they wouldn't have to handle that many permutations. The squad has never interacted before, why should Bioware change that? There's no reason to. Each squad member can have their own unique dialog that doesn't involve others, and a few lines of extra for whether or not some squad members survived or not. For example. Tali can make a comment about how happy/sad she is about Legion surviving, and visa versa. Jack can make a smartass remark about Miranda. Etc. Each squad member can have their own missions which could be made easier by another squad member, but not impossible. This would only change a few factors, similar to how Legion made the Quarians react when you bring him on the flotilla. Each squad member doesn't have to interact with everyone else. 

My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

So yea thats my counterargument, no offence intended. I just want to see my team return 

[Yeti13]

SmokePants wrote...

Yeti13 wrote...

epoch_ wrote...

This thread is incredibly entertaining.

Quite entertaining, It's going to be fun when me3 comes out and BW shocks us all^_^

Not really. This is all just the same ****, different game,
different year. There's never any grand resolution. Slowly, the people with their head in the clouds, dreaming dreams come to realize they were wrong and stop posting well in advance of the game's release. They will blame Bioware for not executing their deluded plans rather than admit their plans were delusional. They'll  get angry, curse the developer, and swear off the game forever like the children they are.

The reason I know I'm on the correct side is because I won't get upset if I'm completely wrong. If Bioware can overcome the many, many hurdles to bring back the squadmates as squadmates, without compromising the quality of the game, I would be ecstatic. No one can accuse me of seeing only what I want to see. That's what separates an objective point of view from a biased one.

No your wrong about that, if BW made ME3 with no returning SM, i will still love it. I wont get angry and i wish to maybe work for BW someday so no i wont curse BW if all or my wishes come true. Do i think my plans are deluded? Not really, the good thing about a video game is that the delovper is only limited by time, money and thier own imagination. If they wanted to BW could have the reapers wipe out all life in the Milky way in ME3. Will they probly not but they could write the story that way. None of us can say that something is definite beacuse nothing is  in a video game.  

[Jaron Oberyn]

xlavaina wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

Polite,

 You do seem to argue that the work done in ME2 means that the squad must be in ME3. That to do otherwise is a waste of time. Yet so far as i can see there are 1096 different squads that could result from what happens in ME2. Do you really think that BioWare can handle that many different variations in the squad? I am not sure they can do that and provide a decent game. Oh I am not saying that the gameplay shooting side will suffer but everything else will and that is what the critisism is about. That fact that we got a shooter that was supposed to be heavy on RPG but turned out to RPG lite at best.

I agree with this to some extent. However, I disagree in the following ways: First, they wouldn't have to handle that many permutations. The squad has never interacted before, why should Bioware change that? There's no reason to. Each squad member can have their own unique dialog that doesn't involve others, and a few lines of extra for whether or not some squad members survived or not. For example. Tali can make a comment about how happy/sad she is about Legion surviving, and visa versa. Jack can make a smartass remark about Miranda. Etc. Each squad member can have their own missions which could be made easier by another squad member, but not impossible. This would only change a few factors, similar to how Legion made the Quarians react when you bring him on the flotilla. Each squad member doesn't have to interact with everyone else. 

My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

So yea thats my counterargument, no offence intended. I just want to see my team return 

I can see this happening. Besides, Mass 3 isn't going to be another recruiting game, but more like DA:O if you think about it.

-Polite

[glacier1701]

xlavaina wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

Polite,

 You do seem to argue that the work done in ME2 means that the squad must be in ME3. That to do otherwise is a waste of time. Yet so far as i can see there are 1096 different squads that could result from what happens in ME2. Do you really think that BioWare can handle that many different variations in the squad? I am not sure they can do that and provide a decent game. Oh I am not saying that the gameplay shooting side will suffer but everything else will and that is what the critisism is about. That fact that we got a shooter that was supposed to be heavy on RPG but turned out to RPG lite at best.

I agree with this to some extent. However, I disagree in the following ways: First, they wouldn't have to handle that many permutations. The squad has never interacted before, why should Bioware change that? There's no reason to. Each squad member can have their own unique dialog that doesn't involve others, and a few lines of extra for whether or not some squad members survived or not. For example. Tali can make a comment about how happy/sad she is about Legion surviving, and visa versa. Jack can make a smartass remark about Miranda. Etc. Each squad member can have their own missions which could be made easier by another squad member, but not impossible. This would only change a few factors, similar to how Legion made the Quarians react when you bring him on the flotilla. Each squad member doesn't have to interact with everyone else. 

My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

So yea thats my counterargument, no offence intended. I just want to see my team return 

 That is my point. The squadmembers can ONLY be handled by assuming that they exist by themselves and that Shepard is the ONLY person they talk to. It makes for a very flat and dull experience which is what we got in ME2. And it is a common complaint about the game that the squadmates were so lifeless. Yet if they were to come back in ME3 thats almost a given as to what we would get again. While I am attached to certain squadmates if there were more life onboard the ship in between missions and the only way to get that was to have new squadmates I'd plump for the new squadmates. It was a complaint from all the way back in ME1 that the Normandy did not seem to be a real ship full of people. We got a slight improvement in ME2 but the ship still felt pretty lifeless. More importantly the kinds of things that can occur are not ground breaking things but things that have occured in much earlier games which had greater limits on what they could do. Yes it might be 'fluff' but it is the small details that make a game that is good into something that is great and ME2 shows a lot of signs that the small details barely got glanced at once and then ok'ed despite many glaring faults.


 To illustrate some of the things that I can think that could work. More variety of music playable in Shepard's cabin coupled with the ability to buy tracks at various stores. Or going to your cabin and finding your LI is there setting a romantic dinner for the 2 of you (nothing fancy in the way of a cutscene - just a slightly enhanced version of what is already in the game - as you kiss after the meal is over. Or just having the squadmates show up in other places like the galley - after all it does appear as if the crew locator was supposed to show where they were IF you need to find them if they moved around but that does appear to have been an initial feature that got cut but would have been a nice touch in say finding Zaeed in the bar rather than down in the cargo hold. As I mentioned many games of the past had these kinds of things - Freespace 2, Starlancer, Wing Commander (to name a few) - and they added to the atmosphere. It is surprising how much people overlook if small details are there. 

Modifié par glacier1701, 14 août 2010 - 12:38 .

[smudboy]

Luc0s wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

xlavaina wrote...

My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

I can see this happening. Besides, Mass 3 isn't going to be another recruiting game, but more like DA:O if you think about it.

-Polite

I don't see this happening. BioWare is not going to withhold content in ME3 from the players who haven't played ME1 and 2. Or players who just can't keep Mordin alive (some people seem to have a hard time keeping him alive in ME2). To keep content away from some players because they haven't played the previous games or because they couldn't keep "squad member X" alive is just stupid and bad game-design.

ME3 isn't going ot be another recruiting game, but more like DA:O? And what is DA:O then exactly? As far as I remember you have to recruit your entire squad in DA:O (except for Alistair who's with you from the beginning).
So assuming ME3 is going to be like DA:O then it's still not an argument to keep the ME2 squad in your ME3 crew.

So what you just said is really dumb, because you first say "ME3 isn't going to be a recruiting game" and then you say "it's going to be like DA:O" which is in fact exactly that, a recruiting game! You shot yourself in the foot Polite, AGAIN. You're not very good at this are you?

I actually can see this happening.

It's what I was referring to as:
2a) plot driven cameo placeholders, or
2b) plot driven squadmates

Which after said plot mission, they then become:
4) functional squadmate placeholders.

That is, we take a character and make them a placeholder, let's say, the Quarian placeholder.  So for Tali, there's Kal'Reegar, or any other quarian representative (doesn't matter.)  They have a single plot relevant mission.  The difference being whether Tali's still on the ship to talk to about the mission, or you get an email that instigates the "go to plot story mission point."  You then go on said mission with the placeholder, and at the end, they join up.  They then become a 4) functional squadmate placeholder (also potentially the Quarian placeholder), and that would be that (meaning no character development outside of potential romance options.)  I can't see them going into more detail in character development, because they'd have to then do that with 23 other characters, and develop each character per placeholder (so 2 at minimum, which is 24 in total.)  Which is a logistical nightmare.  That's not to say they'll all become plot driven cameo placeholders/squadmates, and have a plot/story/level to go on to help with a Rally-Call mission, or what not.  They could just be reduced to purely 4) functional squadmate placeholders, but that would be lame.  Totally doable, but lame.

[glacier1701]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

xlavaina wrote...

glacier1701 wrote...

Polite,

 You do seem to argue that the work done in ME2 means that the squad must be in ME3. That to do otherwise is a waste of time. Yet so far as i can see there are 1096 different squads that could result from what happens in ME2. Do you really think that BioWare can handle that many different variations in the squad? I am not sure they can do that and provide a decent game. Oh I am not saying that the gameplay shooting side will suffer but everything else will and that is what the critisism is about. That fact that we got a shooter that was supposed to be heavy on RPG but turned out to RPG lite at best.

I agree with this to some extent. However, I disagree in the following ways: First, they wouldn't have to handle that many permutations. The squad has never interacted before, why should Bioware change that? There's no reason to. Each squad member can have their own unique dialog that doesn't involve others, and a few lines of extra for whether or not some squad members survived or not. For example. Tali can make a comment about how happy/sad she is about Legion surviving, and visa versa. Jack can make a smartass remark about Miranda. Etc. Each squad member can have their own missions which could be made easier by another squad member, but not impossible. This would only change a few factors, similar to how Legion made the Quarians react when you bring him on the flotilla. Each squad member doesn't have to interact with everyone else. 

My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

So yea thats my counterargument, no offence intended. I just want to see my team return 

I can see this happening. Besides, Mass 3 isn't going to be another recruiting game, but more like DA:O if you think about it.

-Polite

 This is my worry about ME3. That is that the easiest way out will be taken. I dont blame them but it it certainly seems to make a mockery of their main claim to fame of being a game developer that was not afraid to take chances and be innovative. They can still be innovative yet not go too far as to scare the investors and still maintain their reputation yet ME2 seems to be a very large step backward for them in what they did. There is nothing NEW in ME2 that was not seen either in other games or in ME1 (and in some areas these other companies did a much better job). Yet to do what they did they chopped so much of their trademark from the game as to make it seem as if a completely different company developed it. More to the point is that BioWare itself became very rude when the first signs of the way the wind was blowing became apparent in their first previews. Those people on the old forums who pointed out the change were in essence given the middle finger and told that they were acceptable losses if they didnt like what they were seeing.

 While we have yet to see any previews for ME3 (and I dont expect anything till Q1, 2011) the chances for BioWare to show they have listened to our feedback (positive and negative) is available in DLC. The upcoming Liara DLC should be the first chance we get to see major changes (if there are others besides the Biotic change that seems to be forthcoming) and see if they are somewhat on the same frequency as we are. It should also be a chance for them to make good on some of the promises they made. If the next DLC is less than pretty good then I would say that they can kiss making a killing with ME3 because that would show that they value the same old formulaic stuff rather than new innovative ideas. And that would be a nail in the coffin of Mass Effect.

[Harley_Dude]

If you look at ME3 from the perspective of the new player it is doubtful all the characters would return. So for those of us that import a game the likely scenario are cameos for those characters not coded into the base game. The characters in the base game need to be connected to plot lines like the genophage or geth and would have to be easily replaced as stated previously. I don't see a compelling reason to include the DLC characters, Jack, Jacob, Samara or Thane as they offered no continuity to the story. They all felt like filler to me.

[Flamewielder]

smudboy wrote...

xlavaina wrote...
My personal belief for ME3 is that each mission will be a race recruitment mission to fight the reapers. Each squad member can have their own individual side mission(s) that you don't have access to if they died.

I actually can see this happening.

It's what I was referring to as:
2a) plot driven cameo placeholders, or
2b) plot driven squadmates

Which after said plot mission, they then become:
4) functional squadmate placeholders.

That is, we take a character and make them a placeholder, let's say, the Quarian placeholder.  So for Tali, there's Kal'Reegar, or any other quarian representative (doesn't matter.)  They have a single plot relevant mission.  The difference being whether Tali's still on the ship to talk to about the mission, or you get an email that instigates the "go to plot story mission point."  You then go on said mission with the placeholder, and at the end, they join up.  They then become a 4) functional squadmate placeholder (also potentially the Quarian placeholder), and that would be that (meaning no character development outside of potential romance options.)  I can't see them going into more detail in character development, because they'd have to then do that with 23 other characters, and develop each character per placeholder (so 2 at minimum, which is 24 in total.)  Which is a logistical nightmare.  That's not to say they'll all become plot driven cameo placeholders/squadmates, and have a plot/story/level to go on to help with a Rally-Call mission, or what not.  They could just be reduced to purely 4) functional squadmate placeholders, but that would be lame.  Totally doable, but lame.

There's the possibility of "interactive cameos" that would do justice to surviving characters, IF ME3 does turn out to be a "species recruiting" mission; various ME2 squddies may appear as temporary squaddies, assisting Shepard on the recruitment mission of their respective race/organisation. If the character survived ME2, you get him/her back on the squad for this one mission, get a few conversation cut scenes and party banter with the ME3 squaddies. If that character's dead, you simply play the recruitment mission with the ME3 squaddies and miss out on a few cutscenes/interrupts and banter. Minor impact on main plot line insofar as a surviving ME2 may make the level easier in some way, but nothing that would penalize the player unduly should the relevant ME2 squaddie be dead; keep in mind that the writers may decide that the default/new player set up has ALL ME2 characters surviving.

So my personal prediction is ME3 squaddies will number between 6 and 12 (likely 8), will include the Virmire Survivor, Liara plus new squadmates more suited for the ME3 mission (whatever that may be) than the ME2 crew. As for keeping LI's along, consider this: would you prefer your loved ones to accompany you on a suicide mission or have them assist you from a relatively safe distance?

I believe bringing back all ME2 squaddies as full squaddies for ME3 is logistically difficult and might compromise storytelling for the sake of plain fan service. Having them back as non-recruitable single-mission squaddies rewards old players for keeping them alive without penalizing new players. They play a (minor, non-critical) role in the main plot, then move on to other tasks suited to their skill set to assist Shepard from afar. You get 4-6 new characters whose background make them more useful than a Justicar, Assassin, Biotic Powerhouse, Vigilante, Engineer, Merc, Thief, Scientist, etc... Who knows? They might even be great characters! I, for one, have liked every one of them so far...

Modifié par Flamewielder, 14 août 2010 - 07:31 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

The Harley Dude wrote...

If you look at ME3 from the perspective of the new player it is doubtful all the characters would return. So for those of us that import a game the likely scenario are cameos for those characters not coded into the base game. The characters in the base game need to be connected to plot lines like the genophage or geth and would have to be easily replaced as stated previously. I don't see a compelling reason to include the DLC characters, Jack, Jacob, Samara or Thane as they offered no continuity to the story. They all felt like filler to me.

They're not going to penalize us for the sake of new players. Mass 2 had ashley/kaidan/liara/anderson/udina, I could go on forever, and new players didn't know who they were. Thinking that they'll remove characters because some people might not know who they are is illogical. That's what happens when you jump into the second or third act of a trilogy. 

-Polite

[Flamewielder]

Luc0s wrote...
I second this! I even made a topic about a similar idea a few days ago. I think Flamewielder is really on to something here!

It's why I'm curious to see what the Liara DLC will be like. If, as most Liara fans hope, Liara turns out to be single-mission recruitable, then it may very well be the way BW intends to handle ME2 survivors in ME3.

For example:

Samara/Morinth ("The Price of Justice Survivor") - Single mission squaddie in a mission to Thessia to recruit the asari or expose an indoctrinated asari politician trying to discredit Anderson.
Garrus - same as above, maybe an indoctrinated Turian Councillor?
Thane - Single mission squaddie to gain his former hanar employers support.
Miranda - Single mission squaddie to persuade big Cerberus backers to back Shepard directly, instead of The Illusive (Middle)Man...

I think BW writers have enough imagination to come up with interesting ideas.

[McBeath]

We're all assuming that our decisions regarding the genophage/geth ect are important... like the ones in the first game. I also doubt that we'll be on a "Race recruitment" drive around the galaxy.

Shepard to me is more of a special forces commander(which is why he's N7), not an admiral or ambassidor. Either the invasion of the Reapers will unite races or it won't, no amount of Shepard talking will change that. While I can see the Geth being logical and Wrex(if he is even alive) wanting to help, what about the Quarians? Just because Tali wants to help doesn't mean they will.

I think that from a story driven perspective Shepard and team will be involved in some high risk ops against the Reapers and whatever agents they bring to the battle. Not the commanding admiral in some massive space battle(which I can see Anderson doing).

Personally I see ME3 opening with a Reaper first strike somewhere in the galaxy. Without the use of the Citidel(or control of it) I assume that they won't be able to shut down the mass relays like was implied in ME1(at least how I remember it). The protheans were cornered, but the galactic races now won't be. That act should push the council into action, and I see the fleet engagements being fought around mass relays that the Reapers are using. The Normandy is well equiped to launch covert ops onto indoctrinated worlds and perhaps against Reaper vanguard units.

Back on topic, I don't see Shepard and team doing these little befriend this race missions. Just because he's Shepard doesn't mean the Quarians will follow him. That would be as believable for me as a British SAS officer showing up in Canada(my home), doing us a few favours and then asking us to mobilize our population to fight some war. It would make more sense for the British government, not a military commando, to make such a request.

IF we aren't gonna be wasting our time recruiting(which in reality is the Citidel Councils job) it isn't necessary to worry if we have a binary placeholder for a plot required Quarion. Tali dead or alive is irrelevent to the main plot, therefor it's easy to just include her in ME3. Same is true of the other characters, in my humble opinion.

IF I was able to work that out while on the can I'm hoping that Biowares talented writers can come up with a better story

Modifié par McBeath, 14 août 2010 - 07:54 .

[McBeath]

Small addition:

Also, I see a marked difference between the ME1 cameo characters and ME2's, namely that the first games camoes are much more plot relevent.

Liara, regardless of her ME2 role, is the main expert on the Prothean extintion and was first to mention that it had happened before(in ME1). Ash/Kaiden are war heroes and high ranking members of the Alliance, as well as being personally attached to Anderson(Horizon mission). They both can play very important roles in ME3's main plot, with Liara acting in an advisory role and the other being a direct liason to the Alliance or Anderson himself. Depending on your choice to tell Cerberus off or not it makes sense. IF your Cerberus they're on the Normandy for obvious reasons, if not it's also clear as to why they'd join back.

ME2's characters lack that kind of importance. While this may fuel the "since they can die they will be out" arguement I feel that it's just this lack of importance that makes them easy additions to the crew.

Finally, it was previously mentioned that it would be unfair to import a game where Shepard only had 2 surviving crew, and in turn would be unbeatable(therefore Bioware won't do it). I don't see how it would be unbeatable, it just means that you'd be hardpressed in some areas of the game without the right specialists. Frankly, even on Insanity I can pretty much solo run the game, I don't see how ME3 will be any different if using the same overall layout.  This game type would only be available to players who not only bought ME2, but had a terrable playthough.  I think they'll give us more credit in that department, since we have a few years to go back and redo.  That and I see the new game without an import being a game will a full survival rate. 

Must rest fingers now.  Cheers.

Modifié par McBeath, 14 août 2010 - 08:04 .