2338 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaron Oberyn]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Dragon Age: Awakening continues the Main Story of Origins. Because all of the characters could die none of them transferred over except for the one that is almost impossible to kill without cheating: Oghren.

THe DLC of Origins is a different factor as they seem to be taking more the NWN route

Dragon Age didn't have the transfer because it's not like Mass Effect. Mass Effect is the trilogy that has been confirmed to have saves transferable between games. Dragon Age, they haven't even confirmed if they're doing it or not. You can't say that because all of the characters could die that they can't transfer. Seriously, you must know absolutely nothing about video game design. It is entirely possible to make it where the survivors of the 2nd game transfer with you in the 3rd game. The save games have information about who dies or who doesn't. That information is transferable into the third game. So your saying that it's impossible to have different variations in the game, so they can't do it. Unless you know their system and least of all how to work the engine they're using, I doubt your in any position to say what they can't do. 

People thought that in Mass 2 that Wrex was given a cameo only because he could have died. Wrong. He was given a cameo because it was part of the main story that he could unite the clans if he lived. The only reason Wrex, Liara, Ashley, and Kaidan got sidelined was because Bioware wanted to make sure that they live for the third game. That's the only reason they got sidelined. Thinking that this squad will get sidelined in the 3rd game because Bioware can't make it where in one persons game only 4 people transfer, and in another persons game only 6 people transfer is idiotic. I'm going to love it when they start announcing stuff for ME3 and the vids start showing the surviving crew. Because it makes absolutely no sense for them to sideline the crew that the second installment of the trilogy is all about. Mass Effect 2 was all about the team. Shepard already has a loyal crew who he knows. Why would he get another team, or why would they leave, when the reapers are on their way? Did you not see the ending of ME2? 

Don't compare Dragon Age to Mass Effect, because they are taking to very different approaches to how they handle the game.

 -Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

[quote]IoCaster wrote...

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
 ME3 squad will be entirely old and here's why and how.

1.) Ever heard the expression "to fiddle while Rome burns"?: from a storytelling perspective it would be borderline retarded to waste nearly the entire game recruiting a whole new cast while the galaxy is in the middle of a full blown reaper invasion. There is no time for recruitment you fool!!! and there's even less time/potential at this late stage for (new) character development. (I maintain the main cast has already been fully fleshed out in ME & ME2 for precisely this reason)[/quote]

From a storytelling perspective it's beyond retarded to kill off your protagonist and immediately resurrect him/her in the first 15 minutes of the game. It's an absolutely ridiculous contrivance that was seemingly orchestrated for the sole purpose of forcing him/her into a state of indentured servitude to Cerberus.

The surviving ME squad are fully aware of the Reaper threat and rather than doing the 'sensible' thing and helping Shepard in ME2, they get sidelined by the writers.

As far as recruiting a new squad is concerned it's a simple matter of introducing them and saying "Hey Shep, here's your new squad". No recruitment or loyalty missions are required.

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
2.) Closure: Nobody wants to them to waste both their and our time on new characters with very limited potential to be fleshed out at the expense of spending our final days with series fan favs we may never ever see again. A final send off/fitting tribute or it will be colossal mistake.[/quote]

I seriously doubt that EA/BioWare are interested in wasting resources on developing characters that may very well be dead. It's much more efficient and cost effective to use those resources on new characters that they know positively will be alive for every one of their customers. Brief cameos and emails from surviving ME2 squad members is a cheap alternative. From a business perspective that's the most sensible solution.

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
3.) Deja Vu. What was the point of ME2 again? To recruit THE 12 deadliest propagators of badassery in the entire galaxy. Period. Why 12? Because unless you have a serious mental condition you're guaranteed to have at least a handful survive AND have at least 2 returning from ME1 (Liara + Ashley or Kaidan)...[/quote]

The point of recruiting these 12 over-hyped comic book 'heroes' was to provide cannon fodder for an assault on the Collector Base. The "Suicide Mission" that was very prominently marketed and hyped for months before the games release. I don't recall any interview by the devs that stated that they were destined to become a permanent squad for ME3. If I missed this infamous interview, then please be kind enough to provide a link.

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
4.) The combination of which is supposed to vary in accordance with your past choices - it's what makes my game different from yours = consequences: [/quote]

These same consequences that you rely on are the mechanism by which it's logical to reason that there are too many different permutations to account for in bringing these characters back as squad members in ME3.

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
5.) Your past choices are irrelevant to the default cannon however (see ME2):  they don't die unless you made a mistake in your game(s) and contrary to popular misconception the full cast return will equate to in my estimation 10 characters which is not unwieldy or un-managable:[/quote]

If I decide to kill off 10 of my squad on the 'suicide mission' it's hardly irrelevant. It's a legitimate choice that the devs enabled for any player. Is it possible that some people aren't aware that BioWare knew what they were doing when they designed the 'suicide mission'?

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
The default roster for ME3 for new players will be (in order of first appearance):

1. Ashley or Kaidan (depending on Shep's Sex see Virmire default option in ME2)
2. Garrus
3. Tali
4. Liara
5. Miranda
6. Jacob
7. Mordin
8. Jack
9. Grunt
10. Thane

*Legion critically important cameo role... however in default he will be exchanged to Cerberus/Spaced without playing ME2)
*Samara cameo'd for Liara (2 Asari is overkill/unnecessary)
*Kasumi cameo'd as completely optional combined with potential death
**Zaeed cameo'd

Your roster will vary slightly from the default (Ash or Kaidan + deaths) leaving you with bare minimum of 4 characters if you totally suck at Mass Effect (2 ME2 + 2 ME1) or a maximum of 10 if all have survived up to this point.

Further dlc characters will probably be released in post release content to bring this total up to 12 primarily catering to those heavy on casualties.[/quote]

It's nice to want things, but you might be well advised to prepare to be disappointed.

[quote]Guanxii wrote...
I don't see how this scenario is any less feasible than yours.[/quote]

The fact that any or most of the ME2 squad can be killed off on the 'suicide mission' makes one hypothesis more likely than the other. *shrug*














[/quote]
[/quote]

Your saying that because it's possible for a character to be dead, they're not going to worry about bringing them back into your squad? Honestly do you know how ridiculous that sounds? So they're going to punish the players who kept their whole team alive because some people let people die and they don't want to develop the characters, who they gave an entire game to mind you, any further because some people might not see them. 

Um... No. The only reason the handful of ME1 squadmates that didn't return aren't recruitable is because their role in Mass 3 is significant. So they don't want them to die. According to the developers. 

Now just because some characters can die off in ME2 you think they're not going to bring them back? Wrex could die, but they have two versions of the game. One where he is alive, and one where he isn't. Its as simple as that, although with more variables being the entire squad, except Kasumi and Zaeed who would possibly not be in ME3 due to their DLC status and non-developed character. 

So if you can just imagine what they did to wrex, only slightly bigger by making them with more dialogue options and squad status, you'd see that they can in fact make different permutations to the game. As I quoted and linked above, Casey Hudson already confirmed that they were doing that, fixing ME3 according to the number of ways ME2 could end. So if you still think that they'll write off all of the squad mates and then give Shepard a new squad in the last chapter of the trilogy, people you wouldn't even know, then I'm sorry but thats just plain ignorance. 

 -Polite

[Bluko]

kaimanaMM wrote...
So instead, I'll just toss up an Ecael classic.

Recycling?! Recycling old threads is for Hippies and Communists!

We must constantly create new threads to keep the community strong!



Yes I know I'm beating a dead horse, but I like to make sure things stay dead. Also the reason why I'm generally not a fan of necromancey old threads is because people who participated in those discussion may no longer be able to do so if the posts are a few months old. I believe it's better to create new posts on subjects, even if the subject has been debated countlessly before.

Also dare I ask what else might we possibly discuss? I suppose we could ponder why Garrus always has blue armor on instead.

Wait Blue Suns wear blue armor... Garrus wears blue armor. Does this mean Garrus is the Shadow Broker?!

[expanding panic]

I'm doing more hoping then anything else because you are probably right but I believe I heard someone say that if your Shepherd dies at the end of the second Mass effect then he will not be back for mass effect 3; that A Shephed would be just not Your Shepherd.. If you have your squad mates die at the end of the second ME why then they won't be in ME 3. However if they hadn't died then why can't they be back? If someone died in one of your play throughs then they won't be back for that characters ME3 but if they survived then they would be as a playable character.



To me it seemed like Me2 was about gather your team and then the third you would have most of your team maybe pick up a few new guys. But like I said thats more hoping.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Recycling?! Recycling old threads is for Hippies and Communists!



We must constantly create new threads to keep the community strong!

True

[royceclemens]

I'm sorry, Bluko, and I hate to add to the influx of disagreements with you, but I just don't agree. It's hard to find a practical or in-universe way to execute what you are hypothesizing.



Let's say you're right and everyone cameos. With those VAs plus the additional VAs for the new squaddies, wouldn't that be.. y'know.. expensive? Not to mention rendering twelve seperate levels for twelve different cameos would break the bank and boggle the mind. How long would the game be if you had to go to twelve different story planets with VO provided for each?



As for the practicality of importing saves with different possibilities for who lived and who died, well... I don't know if you've seen Ecael's Suicide Mission Guide (and if you haven't, I quite recommend it, it's very enlightening), but contained therein are the staggering number of permutations and possibilities for who can live and who can die at different times in the mission. This means that there are tons of dialogue that a lot of gamers will never hear because they won't playthrough time and time again to see who all can die where and what they'll say when they do so. And this is just for the final forty-five minutes of one game. If they can do that, then carrying the same level of permutations to a thirty hour game should be a piece of cake, shouldn't it? The whole "they won't record dialogue that no one will hear" argument is shot in the foot.



Furthermore, I don't see how cameoing everyone fits some sort of pattern because you need more than two numbers to MAKE a pattern. I know everyone's upset about the ME1 LIs getting sidelined, but I think it's less about personal affronts and shoving new LIs at you than it is pre-emptively averting a temporal paradox by having someone integral to the plot killed in the Suicide Mission. Kinda like how in MGS3 it's a game over if you kill Revolver Ocelot because we know he's still alive forty years later.



I just don't see how BioWare, given all the time and effort they put into JUST the Suicide Mission, would willingly plead ignorance on the game they made by bringing in a whole new squad because carrying over was "just too hard." But this is just me, though.

[Docbrown777]

There better be an option to not have Ashley/Kadon in my ME3 squad.



Ashley is a b!tch and shot Wrex in the back like a coward and Kaiden is the most uninteresting person in the galaxy. Not to mention that if you let Ashley die then Kaiden basically took over her b!tchy personality from that point on (his rant while trying to land on Illos in ME1 and reaction to meeting Shepard in ME2).

[Jaron Oberyn]

http://social.biowar...5/index/3048392



The truth is in there.





-Polite

[Bluko]

royceclemens wrote...
Let's say you're right and everyone cameos. With those VAs plus the additional VAs for the new squaddies, wouldn't that be.. y'know.. expensive? Not to mention rendering twelve seperate levels for twelve different cameos would break the bank and boggle the mind. How long would the game be if you had to go to twelve different story planets with VO provided for each?

As for the practicality of importing saves with different possibilities for who lived and who died, well... I don't know if you've seen Ecael's Suicide Mission Guide (and if you haven't, I quite recommend it, it's very enlightening), but contained therein are the staggering number of permutations and possibilities for who can live and who can die at different times in the mission. This means that there are tons of dialogue that a lot of gamers will never hear because they won't playthrough time and time again to see who all can die where and what they'll say when they do so. And this is just for the final forty-five minutes of one game. If they can do that, then carrying the same level of permutations to a thirty hour game should be a piece of cake, shouldn't it? The whole "they won't record dialogue that no one will hear" argument is shot in the foot.

That's different though. That was just the suicide mission, which was essentially the whole focus of ME2. Trying to incorporate all the various outcomes from ME2 is already difficult. Trying to do all that with squadmates is even more so. Trust me it's a lot easier to have an NPC as a cameo then as a squadmate. Every squadmate requires it's own A.I., scripting, testing, and tons more dialogue for all the various encounters in the game. An NPC cameo is basically pre-programmed and dialogue is directed down straightforward paths. Squadmates have to be able to react to all the missions that may be in the game, which is a lot of work on top of their own dialogues.

Hiring VAs again to do a few planned lines for one particular instance is fairly simple. Also Bioware is going to have to hire more VAs for ME3 anyways. Having them do dialogue for the new squadmates would really change nothing in that regard. It's just my guess there will be less crew in ME3 then ME2, since I'm sure ME3 will be less focused on character development and more about wrapping stuff up storywise.

[Onyx Jaguar]

There aren't that many outcomes you are making things too complicated



Either they die or they don't. Thane's death has no impact on Tali, on and on. Once they are on your ship the only thing that matters is Shepard on them relations

[IoCaster]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Your saying that because it's possible for a character to be dead, they're not going to worry about bringing them back into your squad? Honestly do you know how ridiculous that sounds? So they're going to punish the players who kept their whole team alive because some people let people die and they don't want to develop the characters, who they gave an entire game to mind you, any further because some people might not see them. 

Um... No. The only reason the handful of ME1 squadmates that didn't return aren't recruitable is because their role in Mass 3 is significant. So they don't want them to die. According to the developers. 

Now just because some characters can die off in ME2 you think they're not going to bring them back? Wrex could die, but they have two versions of the game. One where he is alive, and one where he isn't. Its as simple as that, although with more variables being the entire squad, except Kasumi and Zaeed who would possibly not be in ME3 due to their DLC status and non-developed character. 

So if you can just imagine what they did to wrex, only slightly bigger by making them with more dialogue options and squad status, you'd see that they can in fact make different permutations to the game. As I quoted and linked above, Casey Hudson already confirmed that they were doing that, fixing ME3 according to the number of ways ME2 could end.

The interview you linked doesn't say anything about bringing the ME2 squad forward into ME3 as squad members. That's your preferred interpretation of what this means:

Question - "There have to be a crazy number of permutations for how you can end your story in Mass Effect 2. How much of a nightmare is it for you guys to figure out how to address that for Mass Effect 3?"

Answer - (Casey Hudson) - "It's ... very hard."

What's very hard? It's pretty open to interpretation isn't it?

Here's a quote from another Casey Hudson interview via Best Buy chat log:

Best Buy chat

Here's an excerpt:

WhisperPiano: By now, we are aware that most of the characters from the first game have been given greatly reduced roles, including the three potential love interests. While the new crew is intriguing, many of us are irked by what appears to be a disregard for the personal subplots through which each of our Shepards' stories were individualized. My question is: wil those of us who choose to have our Shepards remain faithful to one of the original romance options be able to come away as satisfied with the roma...


CaseyH-ME2: WhisperPiano - this is an interesting question that we see a lot. Here's our take...


CaseyH-ME2: While Mass Effect fans have grown to love our characters, you can imagine that after spending years crafting them, we have at least as much of an attachment to them. So it's definitely not a case of the team disregarding player's decisions with them or interest in those characters - in fact, it's the opposite...


CaseyH-ME2: We actually want to make sure these characters survive the ME2 story, which ultimately is a suicide mission: some of your crew will almost certainly die. Some of the ME1 characters are back, and recruitable (more than you might think), and the ones that aren't still play an important role in the story and will be around for ME3 - which we can't say for the new characters.


CaseyH-ME2: Another important thing to consider is that much of the fun of ME1 was the discovery of new people and places. If we made ME2 out of the same characters, you'd miss out of the fun of that discovery.

He is  pretty specific in saying that the new characters from ME2 are not guaranteed to be in ME3.

 

PoliteAssasin wrote...
So if you still think that they'll write off all of the squad mates and then give Shepard a new squad in the last chapter of the trilogy, people you wouldn't even know, then I'm sorry but thats just plain ignorance. 

 -Polite

Right after I finished playing ME I had all kinds of ideas about where the story would go in ME2. Not for one single moment did I think that ME2 was going to start by killing Shepard, resurrecting him/her, force him/her to work for Cerberus, introduce the Collectors as an enemy, sideline Liara or Ash/Kaiden, etc,..

You really want to call me ignorant for not presuming that BioWare won't sideline the surviving ME2 squad and relegate them to brief cameos and emails?

Modifié par IoCaster, 08 juillet 2010 - 02:27 .

[Ecael]

Bluko wrote...

Hiring VAs again to do a few planned lines for one particular instance is fairly simple. Also Bioware is going to have to hire more VAs for ME3 anyways. Having them do dialogue for the new squadmates would really change nothing in that regard. It's just my guess there will be less crew in ME3 then ME2, since I'm sure ME3 will be less focused on character development and more about wrapping stuff up storywise.

Actually, since many of the VAs do not reside near Edmonton, it would cost BioWare a full day of hourly pay for a voice actor to travel there and record a few lines.

[NICKjnp]

Ecael wrote...

Bluko wrote...

Hiring VAs again to do a few planned lines for one particular instance is fairly simple. Also Bioware is going to have to hire more VAs for ME3 anyways. Having them do dialogue for the new squadmates would really change nothing in that regard. It's just my guess there will be less crew in ME3 then ME2, since I'm sure ME3 will be less focused on character development and more about wrapping stuff up storywise.

Actually, since many of the VAs do not reside near Edmonton, it would cost BioWare a full day of hourly pay for a voice actor to travel there and record a few lines.

That is why most VA record there lines in Hollywood as well as whatever the big media city in Canada is and the Bioware staff goes there... I think.

[Malanek]

Bluko wrote...

Wynne wrote...
I'm all for pessimism, as it's the only way to be pleasantly surprised, but this assumption is just... fail to the point of utter trolling, OP. Bioware = not stupid. They aren't going to alienate a humongous fanbase by leaving out already established, beloved characters for whom they wouldn't have to write a whole new background, introduce, etc. This is the LAST GAME IN THE SERIES. That means they pull out all the stops; no ifs, ands, buts, or maybes.

I'm not trying to troll here, although yes I'm aware the idea I'm advocating isn't exactly popular.

I too use to think that Bioware would by any means bring back everyone's favorite characters as squadmates again in ME3. The only problem is this results in a gameplay balance nightmare for ME3. As a Dev my first priority is likely going to be building a balanced and fun game. After that comes story, which is usually used to explain the gameplay decision anyways.

There is little difference to game balance whether the player has 2 or 200 squadmates to select from. You can only use 2 at a time. As for fun, I think most people would find it more fun if there were at least some familiar faces. I agree with what Wynne said. Getting rid of all the squadmates would be so obviously unpopular that it is not going to happen.

[royceclemens]

Bluko wrote...
That's different though. That was just the suicide mission, which was essentially the whole focus of ME2. Trying to incorporate all the various outcomes from ME2 is already difficult. Trying to do all that with squadmates is even more so. Trust me it's a lot easier to have an NPC as a cameo then as a squadmate. Every squadmate requires it's own A.I., scripting, testing, and tons more dialogue for all the various encounters in the game. An NPC cameo is basically pre-programmed and dialogue is directed down straightforward paths. Squadmates have to be able to react to all the missions that may be in the game, which is a lot of work on top of their own dialogues.

I think my point still stands, though, with all due respect.  More factors figure into the final forty-five minutes of ME2 than would the end results of said forty-five minutes into ME3.  The potential filters throughout the course of the mission until, for each character you simply have to factor whether they live, whether they're loyal and whether they're romanced.  Onyx Jaguar is right in this respect, as the number of factors for an individual squaddie being imported into ME3 aren't all that far-reaching.  We also have to factor in the interview that PoliteAssassin linked to, where it's stated that a thousand decisions will carry over into ME3.  Take away all the ones that tie into character development and how many do we honestly have?

And I'm still sticking to my guns on the VA score.  What you propose entails new squad member VAs, plus all the oldies coming back for cameos, PLUS any number of sidequest characters who are also coming back PLUS any number of new sidequest VA.  That's a logistical nightmare even worse than the one you entailed in your first post, so wouldn't it be more cost-efficient, more time-efficient and more crowd pleasing just to bring all the old squaddies back in their old capacity?

IoCaster wrote...
He is pretty specific in saying that the new characters from ME2 are not guaranteed to be in ME3.

First off, I hate that you or I or anyone else on Earth has to divine the meaning of quotes from a video game developer as though they were Confucian tenets or Bob Dylan lyrics. It's demeaning on a primal level.  But while you said is true in the strictest sense, I took it to mean that the ME1 characters that didn't make it into ME2 were not expendable while the ME2 characters are.  Simply illustrated in that if Tali dies in ME2, ME3 gets harder.  If Liara or the VirSur were recruitable in ME2 and died at the end,  ME3 doesn't happen at all.  I'm not disagreeing with you in all that strict a sense, but I don't think that quote means entirely what you think it does.

IoCaster wrote...
Right after I finished playing ME I had all kinds of ideas about where the story would go in ME2. Not for one single moment did I think that ME2 was going to start by killing Shepard, resurrecting him/her, force him/her to work for Cerberus, introduce the Collectors as an enemy, sideline Liara or Ash/Kaiden, etc,..

You really want to call me ignorant for not presuming that BioWare won't sideline the surviving ME2 squad and relegate them to brief cameos and emails?

I hate to interject on this point and I would never call anyone here assembled ignorant... But basically you're saying that because you were wrong before, you're correct now.  I'm not sure how that works.

Modifié par royceclemens, 08 juillet 2010 - 03:52 .

[Uber Rod]

I have to agree with the OP. Given all the different combinations of who could survive the suicide mission and the sheer number of squadmates in ME2, Bioware would really need to come up with new squadmates and/or Liara and/or Ashley/Kaidan. It would be a heck of a lot of work to write parts, record dialog etc. for all the possible combinations. It would be much simpler to just come up with some new folks and bring back Liara and Ashley/Kaidan, especially since everyone could have died in ME2. What if only a small handful survived? They would still need to create new characters to fill up the squad slots. And if all survived, they would have way too many squad members. How do you reconcile that? Also for those who stuck with their original love interest from ME1, this really would need to some closure.



Granted I would be really cool if Bioware spent the time and energy to include all possible combinations of living squadmates plus the need for new/recurring members and included them in ME3, but is that realistic? Regardless of whether or not any squad member in ME2 should still be around, or would logically still be around, it would be too much work for the development team to animate, do dialog and write storylines for every single character from ME2 plus any new characters that would be needed. If everyone died, then they would be essentially wasting their time including the old characters. If everyone lived there would be no real need to bring in new characters except Liara and Ashley/Kaidan as 12 is plenty enough as it is.



I'm also betting that ME3 will be very much like Dragon Age in that you need to recruit the aid of all the relevant species to fight the Reapers leading up to a huge epic battle in the end. This leads to the possibility of reconciliation between the Geth and the Quarians.

[Uber Rod]

Well in ME1, you knew exactly who was going to live and die with one variable (Ashley or Kaidan) and Wrex. Doing extra voice acting for ME2 was minimal. You only had 5 squad mates.

But with ME2, you have a much larger variable going on. No one could survive (even Shephard). Or all could survive. Or only some could survive. You also have up to 12 squad mates.

If everyone dies and you import the game into ME3, how's that going to be handled? You still end up doing voice acting for all the original squad members (because they could have lived) as well as for any new characters that will be needed in case all the original died. That is a lot of work and money, not just in voice acting, but animation etc.. Is Bioware prepared to spend the extra money to make sure all combinations are fully supported, or go the less expensive way of making them all NPC's with new squad members and the return of Liara and Ashley/Kaidan?

That what this discussion comes down to is whether or not Bioware will invest extra money to fully include all the original squad members from ME2 plus any additional characters needed if they all died. It's not a matter of story continuity. It's a matter of how much work Bioware wants to do.

Granted I hope they do the extra work and include all the squad members from ME2 plus add Liara and Ashley/Kaidan plus some new folks, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Modifié par Uber Rod, 08 juillet 2010 - 04:18 .

[IoCaster]

royceclemens wrote...

IoCaster wrote...
He is pretty specific in saying that the new characters from ME2 are not guaranteed to be in ME3.

First off, I hate that you or I or anyone else on Earth has to divine the meaning of quotes from a video game developer as though they were Confucian tenets or Bob Dylan lyrics. It's demeaning on a primal level.  But while you said is true in the strictest sense, I took it to mean that the ME1 characters that didn't make it into ME2 were not expendable while the ME2 characters are.  Simply illustrated in that if Tali dies in ME2, ME3 gets harder.  If Liara or the VirSur were recruitable in ME2 and died at the end,  ME3 doesn't happen at all.  I'm not disagreeing with you in all that strict a sense, but I don't think that quote means entirely what you think it does.

I'm not trying to redefine what the meaning of "is", is. Liara and Ash/Kaiden were kept on the sidelines to ensure their survival and presence in ME3. There's no guarantee that any of the ME2 squad will be in ME3. There's a case to be made that he meant that they won't have a prominent role in ME3. If we choose that interpretation then it still would indicate that they won't be squad members. That's pretty much the topic of the thread.

IoCaster wrote...
Right after I finished playing ME I had all kinds of ideas about where the story would go in ME2. Not for one single moment did I think that ME2 was going to start by killing Shepard, resurrecting him/her, force him/her to work for Cerberus, introduce the Collectors as an enemy, sideline Liara or Ash/Kaiden, etc,..

You really want to call me ignorant for not presuming that BioWare won't sideline the surviving ME2 squad and relegate them to brief cameos and emails?

royceclemens wrote...
I hate to interject on this point and I would never call anyone here assembled ignorant... But basically you're saying that because you were wrong before, you're correct now.  I'm not sure how that works.

Not exactly. I have been debating various assumptions that have been put forth for establishing that the ME2 squad will be carried forward as squad members in ME3. I have not definitively made a claim that it absolutely won't happen or that it's impossible. I'm extremely skeptical that it will happen and have brought up a fair number of reasons why I believe it's very unlikely. To characterize that stance as ignorant is quite a stretch. 

Modifié par IoCaster, 08 juillet 2010 - 04:27 .

[royceclemens]

IoCaster wrote...

I'm not trying to redefine what the meaning of "is", is. Liara and Ash/Kaiden were kept on the sidelines to ensure their survival and presence in ME3. There's no guarantee that any of the ME2 squad will be in ME3. There's a case to be made that he meant that they won't have a prominent role in ME3. If we choose that interpretation then it still would indicate that they won't be squad members. That's pretty much the topic of the thread.

Yeah, there's a case to be made, but it's not a very good one.  If we go by your interpretation and cling to the last eight words of Hudson's quote, then you're essentially answering a question that WhisperPiano didn't ask.  WP didn't ask about the new squad.  He asked why the ME1 LIs weren't recruitable this time out.  It's not really that big of a strike against the ME2 squad once you take it all in context. 

Not exactly. I have been debating various assumptions that have been put forth for establishing that the ME2 squad will be carried forward as squad members in ME3. I have not definitively made a claim that it absolutely won't happen or that it's impossible. I'm extremely skeptical that it will happen and have brought up a fair number of reasons why I believe it's very unlikely. To characterize that stance as ignorant is quite a stretch. 

Fair enough, but you've provided no basis for your skepticism other than what ME2 gave you which, by your own admission, you were wrong about proceeding from ME1.  You've countered arguments with the bromide that the ME2 squad will be cameoed or we'll get emails from them.  But if you were wrong about what would happen going into ME2, then how can you define your hypotheses in ME2 terms?  Aren't you essentially falling into the same trap a second time?

Modifié par royceclemens, 08 juillet 2010 - 05:13 .

[pvt_java]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

rpg_guy01 wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

That Yellow Bastard wrote...

No I literally can find no logical reason for Garrus or Legion to leave.

There wasn't a logical reason for Liara to leave either, but they created one. 

Well Shepard being death as a doornail and the alliance splitting up the team seemed pretty logical to my mind.

Same thing could happen in ME 3.  The Alliance Marine at the start shoots down the SR-2 because Shepard is working for Cerberus and only Shepard lives, or Shepard escapes in a pod leaving their crew to their fate. 

BioWare isn't going to pull the same "the normandy blows up and your squadmates move on" routine again. It's not like Shepard is dying/dissapearing for years on end again in the third one. Not even BioWare is that retarded.

[Massadonious1]

Shandepared wrote...

Cancermeat wrote...

i dont think the best ending will be the one where nobody dies, whats the point of a journey without loss?

Agreed. That's my biggest gripe with the suicide mission, actually. The most satisfying victory is that which comes at great cost, which makes you struggle and work for it.

Actually, it just means you're a terrible commander.

[yummysoap]

Bioware aren't going to give us an entirely new cast when 90% of ME2 was recruiting and developing squadmates. There was a reason story was less of a focus in ME2, and that's because ME3 doesn't want us trotting off to the citadel to have a chat with Garrus' cousin in the midst of a full reaper invasion.

Say anything about the decisions they've made in the past (I know I have), it doesn't change the fact that Bioware is very good at what they do. Most likely they developed ME2 with full consideration of the points you addressed after they learnt what a cluster**** it was to carry things over from ME1.

I'm not saying there won't be compromises that we won't like, but there is no way in hell they're going to give us an all-new squad. At most I'd wager maybe one or two new faces, and that's probably only for the Shepards incompetent enough to get everyone killed.

Modifié par yummysoap, 08 juillet 2010 - 05:57 .