2338 réponses à ce sujet

[I99I Dragoon]

Call this the final thread of hope for returning squadmates, but I'll stick with the Trilogy argument: in the third act of any trilogy, the players are all on the field, meaning everything is set to commence with the final plan in the over-arching story. There are never any radical changes from the second act to the third act, so I highly doubt there will be new squaddies, a new ship, or anything that extreme. The ending of ME2 set the stage: theres your group, just you, your squaddies, and your ship,, and theres the enemy...have at it.

[SmokePants]

Movie or book trilogies are 100% deterministic. When they made Return of the Jedi, they knew Lando survived Empire Strikes Back, so they could have him pilot the Millennium Falcon and blow up the second Death Star. Now suppose they don't know whether Lando is alive or dead. They don't know whether Han got freed from the Carbonite. They don't know whether Luke chose to recruit or slaughter the Ewoks. Planning a story revolving around uncertainties is next to impossible. And the more you try to MAKE it possible, the more you crap everything up. Working from a clean slate and eliminating or isolating as much uncertainty as possilbe not only makes the game do-able, but it gives the end product a chance to be coherent.

Modifié par SmokePants, 24 août 2010 - 10:32 .

[Flamewielder]

And that is why ME2 characters MAY come back but CANNOT be driving the story, as it would require them to be alive in ME3. They may return as non story-related squadmates, single-scenario specific squadmates or simply cameos ("à la Wrex").

Developers have been quoted as saying they had plans for the Virmire Survivor and Liara in ME3 and/or post-suicide mission DLC. They made it so that both are garanteed to be alive by the end of ME2, so it is possible they'll both be part of the ME3 squad. That gives you 2 potential squadmates.

If BW decides to make the ME3 squad small (i.e. 6 squaddies), we may see 2 ME1 + 3 new ME3 + 1 ME2 survivor(should BW bother with them), or 2 ME1 + 4 new ME3 squaddies. I personally lean more towards 8 squaddies, but any number is possible depending on what BW intends to give us as a story.

Some players have often commented that 12 squadmates for ME2 was too many. I understand where they are coming from, but it made sense for ME2: in order for the player to feel like he's got something to lose in the suicide mission, he has to have developped some form of emotional attachement to at least SOME of the characters he leaves behind to hold the line, lead the second fireteam, infiltrate the ducts or simply die because of failure to upgrade.

Case in point: some players take a sadistic pleasure in  sending characters they despise into the ducts... if the ME2 squad had been made of only 6 characters like in ME1, it's likely most players would have cared for only 2 (the ones they keep with Shepard)  and be indifferent to wether the other 4 survived or not.

So the large size of the ME2 squad makes sense as a storytelling/tension-building tool. We can expect the size of the ME3 squad to fit whatever style of story they plan to tell.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Wow, you guys are still on this?



-Polite

[ManBearPig91]

Why are you guys all trying to rationalize/justify getting rid of the entire old squad in Mass Effect 3, even when many of you say yourselves you don't like the idea? And look at it, Bioware has stickied your  thread; don't encourage them. Obviously not everyone will be back, but at the very least 2 or 3 from each game ought to return.

Bioware is a company, and if we as consumers demand (with our wallets) that certain members of the squad return and some continuity is maintained, then Bioware will listen.

[Marta Rio]

ManBearPig91 wrote...
And look at it, Bioware has stickied your thread; don't encourage them.

I honestly think the people at Bioware stickied this so they could have a chuckle at our expense. People working themselves into a frenzy based on little to no information? Hi-larious, especially if you know the actual truth.

I'm sure by now they have seen the ten kazillion threads explaining why people love the ME1/2 characters so much, so I wouldn't worry about them getting ideas about dumping the characters because a few people can make arguments that it makes rational/fiscal/etc sense.  In the end, they may end up cameoing the entire squad (for whatever reason), but it won't be due to the discussion in this thread.

Modifié par Marta Rio, 25 août 2010 - 04:59 .

[McBeath]

Flamewielder wrote...

McBeath wrote...
No, not the Reaper... the weapon that fired the shot that disabled the Reaper.  TIM states that after they studied the great rift one Klendaggen(sp?) the ploted the rounds course and found both the Reaper and the weapon(which is now defunct in his words).  I think perhaps I wasn't clear on what I was talking about.

We lost the Reaper, but the weapon was never seen or mentioned again... and I believe laying around somewhere to be used again.  I like to think it's a massive space bound station(like a planetary defence platform) but who knows what it is other than the writers.

Ah! My mistake, then... You're right, the defunct weapon that killed that reaper can still provide technological insight for future anti-reaper weaponry (similar to what the turians did with the Thanix cannon).

The Reapers manipulate organics so that their technology evolves along the lines the Reapers have chosen, presumably because it makes it easy for them to defend against technology they have superior understanding of. The corollary of this is that any technology NOT part of the Reaper plan will present a challenge to them, assuming it is powerful enough. So the stage is already set for a technological deus ex machina, should Bioware plan on Shepard dealing with the Reaper threat permanently. This being said, if the Reapers go, what kind of enemy could top them? I'm hard pressed to imagine a more epic enemy for any future ME universe game... It'll feel like Season 5 of Babylon 5, after the Shadows and Vorlons dissappeared: anticlimactic.

Yeah, I see where your coming from in regards to the future franchise.  Who knows, maybe they'll only be stopped, not destroyed.  Maybe Bioware will come up with some new species to threaten future gamers.  Should be interesting.

Ps... love the Babylon 5 referance.  I vote Garibaldi(sp?) for squadmate in ME3... though only if he's drunk.

Cheers.

[SmokePants]

It doesn't matter how much you love something, if it has a terminal illness, it's going to go away. The suicide mission was like inoperable brain cancer for your squad.

[kyle924]

ManBearPig91 wrote...

Why are you guys all trying to rationalize/justify getting rid of the entire old squad in Mass Effect 3, even when many of you say yourselves you don't like the idea? And look at it, Bioware has stickied your  thread; don't encourage them. Obviously not everyone will be back, but at the very least 2 or 3 from each game ought to return.

Bioware is a company, and if we as consumers demand (with our wallets) that certain members of the squad return and some continuity is maintained, then Bioware will listen.

Exactly. Others would not enjoy rationalizing on getting rid of the entire crew because Shepard HAS to survive - there's no way around other than squad members that would be chosen by Bioware.

Which brings me to something else. At the very least, 2 squad members would survive w/Shepard. But in my opinion, I would rather see 4 SMs. In the ending of ME 2, no matter how you end it, there will always be 4 squad members (unless you choose to have 2-3). Which will lead to a tough decision - if the beginning on ME 3 only had 4 squad members (Chakwas and crew TBD), who would you choose?

Modifié par kyle924, 25 août 2010 - 05:06 .

[ManBearPig91]

SmokePants wrote...

It doesn't matter how much you love something, if it has a terminal illness, it's going to go away. The suicide mission was like inoperable brain cancer for your squad.

There's no indication that that's true though. To date Liara is unkillable, which seems to point she would return, furthermore Legion technically can't die, by virtue of the fact that he is Geth. Should he be killed in the SM, his memories are all stored in the Geth hard drives, a new Legion could easily be built.

Also Miranda, Garrus, and Grunt are particularly difficult to kill in the Suicide Mission. Miranda Bioware made a conscious decision to make it hard for the player to lose her. Seems to me that at least a small portion of the squad is meant to come back.

[SmokePants]

Liara doesn't go on the suicide mission, so she is obviously excused. Although, she's still a less-than-ideal candidate to return to your team, because of her love interest status. Is she in love with Sheperd or not? If not, would Sheperd have another shot at romancing her? If he already romanced her, does he romance her again? How would this uncertain relationship affect their freqient interactions as squadmates?

So, while Liara isn't terminal, she's fairly used-up at this point. It would probably be easier and better not to have her back. This Liara DLC could be BioWare throwing a bone to the Liara fans to steel them against future disappointment.

Ashley and Kaiden is a unique circumstance. It's not unheard-of to have binary characters in an RPG, but binary characters are usually terrible because they have to occupy the same generic role and they don't have as much work put into them as a guaranteed character. Plus, few outside of the hopeless romantics on this forum give a crap about Kaiden or Ashley. As characters, they are qualirative duds.

Miranda had important decision-related lines throughout the suicide mission. She is one of the few guaranteed to be on the suicide mission and it was just easier to preserve her until her function was exhausted than to record substitute dialogue with every other character.

As for Legion, the Geth aren't Cylons. They have their memories archived, but they do not resurrect. Even if they did, Legion was out of range on the suicide mission. Besides, a new Legion isn't going to have the hole or the N7 armor.

Party characters in BioWare games primarily function as lenses to view the respective worlds. As such, most of them have served their purpose.

Modifié par SmokePants, 25 août 2010 - 07:16 .

[MrFob]

I didn't read the whole topic. In fact I only read the OP and the last page.
However, I pretty much agree with the OP and suspect something along this line.
But here is a crazy idea: What if they come up with a completely new squad mechanic in ME3?
First of all, I think (and I sure hope) that ME3 will again be much more plot based (as opposed to ME2 which was 90% Squad/Character based). If that is the case, they could give us a "core team" consisting of say 4 characters, all of them new. Each of the main missions would then have the option of taking only one member of the core team as well as a temporary ally. THese allies would be character from the old games (if they are still alive).
E.g. when you try to gain the support of the quarian flotilla, you go on a mission for them and you either take the guys from your team or you can team up with Tali because you meet her just before the mission.
If the character applicable for that mission is dead, you just have to rely on the core team.
That would allow BW to have confined but yet substantial roles for all the old comrades without having to have too many permutations for interactions between several characters that may or may not be alive (because they are handled separately).
Well, I don't know what BW will come up with, I just hope they will find a good balance between characters and story this time (like they had in ME1). I think a system like this would provide such balance.

Modifié par MrFob, 25 août 2010 - 07:38 .

[Flamewielder]

McBeath wrote...
Yeah, I see where your coming from in regards to the future franchise.  Who knows, maybe they'll only be stopped, not destroyed.  Maybe Bioware will come up with some new species to threaten future gamers.  Should be interesting.

Ps... love the Babylon 5 referance.  I vote Garibaldi(sp?) for squadmate in ME3... though only if he's drunk.

Cheers.

Lando, Vir and Garibaldi are the three characters that defines the B5 universe for me.
M: "So what about you?, What would you like, V?
V: "...I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike, as a warning to the next 10 generations that some favors come at too high a price... I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave, like this... Could you and your associates arrange this for me, Mister M?"

Modifié par Flamewielder, 25 août 2010 - 01:34 .

[JasonDaPsycho]

MrFob wrote...

But here is a crazy idea: What if they come up with a completely new squad mechanic in ME3?
First of all, I think (and I sure hope) that ME3 will again be much more plot based (as opposed to ME2 which was 90% Squad/Character based). If that is the case, they could give us a "core team" consisting of say 4 characters, all of them new. Each of the main missions would then have the option of taking only one member of the core team as well as a temporary ally. THese allies would be character from the old games (if they are still alive).
E.g. when you try to gain the support of the quarian flotilla, you go on a mission for them and you either take the guys from your team or you can team up with Tali because you meet her just before the mission.
If the character applicable for that mission is dead, you just have to rely on the core team.
That would allow BW to have confined but yet substantial roles for all the old comrades without having to have too many permutations for interactions between several characters that may or may not be alive (because they are handled separately).
Well, I don't know what BW will come up with, I just hope they will find a good balance between characters and story this time (like they had in ME1). I think a system like this would provide such balance.

Given ME2's sophisticated nature, I believe BW won't take the "easy" way out. No I'm not saying that your idea is bad, but for ME, a more plot driven game rather than a gameplay driven game, characters consistency plays a big part.
Just stop and think, they set up the entire ME2 to feature a bunch of new characters and gave all of them extremely detailed backstories. ME2's plot places heavy focus on characters and has a more character driven plot. I believe the writers didn't take a sudden change in direction just for the sake of it, but to provide a set up for the third installment.
The first one allows us to know about Commander Shepard, and the second one allows us to know his crew. The third one is the real deal. That's the way I see it.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against writing off the major characters in the game. It's just so awkward having the need to provide a story to explain why they're not there as Shepard's crew. No way the writers are going to blow up Normandy again or kill them off in a convenient way.
I'm not disagreeing with the OP, I'm just saying I don't think it will work with all of our current crew diminshing into side characters.
And for least, they'll bring back Tali and Garrus.

[Marta Rio]

MrFob wrote...
But here is a crazy idea: What if they come up with a completely new squad mechanic in ME3?
First of all, I think (and I sure hope) that ME3 will again be much more plot based (as opposed to ME2 which was 90% Squad/Character based). If that is the case, they could give us a "core team" consisting of say 4 characters, all of them new. Each of the main missions would then have the option of taking only one member of the core team as well as a temporary ally. THese allies would be character from the old games (if they are still alive).
E.g. when you try to gain the support of the quarian flotilla, you go on a mission for them and you either take the guys from your team or you can team up with Tali because you meet her just before the mission.
If the character applicable for that mission is dead, you just have to rely on the core team.
That would allow BW to have confined but yet substantial roles for all the old comrades without having to have too many permutations for interactions between several characters that may or may not be alive (because they are handled separately).
Well, I don't know what BW will come up with, I just hope they will find a good balance between characters and story this time (like they had in ME1). I think a system like this would provide such balance.

I like it!  It would kind of invalidate the idea of "choices substantially affecting the outcome of ME3", but we all know Bioware wasn't really serious about that anyway.

Modifié par Marta Rio, 25 août 2010 - 01:40 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

SmokePants wrote...

It doesn't matter how much you love something, if it has a terminal illness, it's going to go away. The suicide mission was like inoperable brain cancer for your squad.

And yet I've never lost a single squadie on that mission...

[Eldareus]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

And yet I've never lost a single squadie on that mission...

I second this. It's overly simple to ensure all sqauds members live through the mission. 
Invest in all upgrades,
Perform all and succeed the loyalty quests.
Never choose a side in any disagreement between squad members.
Choose the strongest member for the mission task at hand.

Go home victorious with entire sqaud entact.

I wouldn't even classify the final misson as a suicide mission at all. After several play throughs I really think Bioware should have limited the players choices on the final mission and purposely killed off team members to  prevent the player from having entact team at the end. This would have giving the mission more realism and more emotional impact knowing beloved characters were truely making their final appearances in the mass effect universe.  

My 2 cents and cup o coffee opinon is that Bioware really painted themselves into a corner with the amount ambiguity in the ending. The possible outcomes where the whole team including the main protagonist could end up dead or the whole team surviving the mission without  recieving so much of a  scratch. That's alot of variables to juggle and stll manage to craft into a believable storyline.

I think Mass effect 2 needs a major DLC/expanison just to resolve the whole final mission / team ambiguity problems and set up a clean slate for mass effect 3. The content might even have to introduce a new main protagionist seeing how that could be that option as well.  

Overall I think the fans of the Mass effect universe should hopefully  have a pretty good idea who is or isn't available for the next installment.

Thank you Bioware for creating such a great game and universe for us geeks to banter about and discuss.

[smudboy]

Eldareus wrote...
Overall I think the fans of the Mass effect universe should hopefully  have a pretty good idea who is or isn't available for the next installment.

Well color me confused.

[Harley_Dude]

ManBearPig91 wrote...

Why are you guys all trying to rationalize/justify getting rid of the entire old squad in Mass Effect 3, even when many of you say yourselves you don't like the idea? And look at it, Bioware has stickied your  thread; don't encourage them. Obviously not everyone will be back, but at the very least 2 or 3 from each game ought to return.

Bioware is a company, and if we as consumers demand (with our wallets) that certain members of the squad return and some continuity is maintained, then Bioware will listen.

Logistically it would be difficult to have every team member return as a squad member due to all the permutations of squad death. They could do it but a lot of content would be missed when using an import which includes fatalities. For that reason it is more likely the returning squad members will be limited to those that can be easily replaced like Legion (copy), Miranda (sister) or Grunt (tank). I could see where Thane could be replaced by his son, Mordin replaced by Chorbin and Samara by her other daughter but its a stretch. The DLC members and Jack don't have any placeholder that I can think of.

[Eldareus]

@smudboy

I am sorry for the confusion, my point was that the final mission created too many plot possiblities with surviving/deceased squadmembers and Bioware should dedicate a DLC or expansion to close the loose ends pretaining to your character and squadmates. Going into Mass effect 3 the player should have a sense that they will either have to rebuild a new team from scratch (most team members died ) or fill in some holes ( some members died or choose to leave the team for reason explained in the DLC/expansion). Assuming the events of Mass effect 3 will occur shortly after the events Mass effect 2. Bioware might just pull another kill shepard off again start from scratch approach or have events occur way off into the future where Shepard and his team no longer play a significant role anymore.

[Lvl20DM]

I'm expecting another time-lapse. The game could jump in with "the continuing story of Shepherd" -exploring a prothean ruin or something else Reaper-relevant. They can fill us in on what happened since ME 2 during or shortly after the prologue. I think that ME 3 will have to be more plot oriented than 2, but I don't think that means we can't have new squadmates. I still maintain that keeping the old crew would be bad for the game and the story. A big part of the fun is getting to know new characters as they join your team.



I love the idea of using temporary squadmates to re- introduce old characters! They appear to be doing something like this with LotSB.

[SmokePants]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

It doesn't matter how much you love something, if it has a terminal illness, it's going to go away. The suicide mission was like inoperable brain cancer for your squad.

And yet I've never lost a single squadie on that mission...

That is so not the point.

[Killjoy Cutter]

SmokePants wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

It doesn't matter how much you love something, if it has a terminal illness, it's going to go away. The suicide mission was like inoperable brain cancer for your squad.

And yet I've never lost a single squadie on that mission...

That is so not the point.

How so?   It's not exactly terminal if no one dies. 

Or are you saying that the end of the mission absolutely has to mean the breakup of the entire squad?   I'm not sure how that's the case, when at least half of them have little reason to leave.  Sure, Zaeed might leave to hunt Vido, Samara might go back to one of the worlds she mentions going back to clean up or on word of another ArdatYakshi, and so on.  But contriving a reason for every single squadie to leave, including any LI, would cross the line into the absurd.

[Flamewielder]

Eldareus wrote...
@smudboy
I am sorry for the confusion, my point was that the final mission created too many plot possiblities with surviving/deceased squadmembers and Bioware should dedicate a DLC or expansion to close the loose ends pretaining to your character and squadmates.

You're facing the same problem as ME3 for such a DLC: the DLC doesn't know who lived or died, so the DLC will have to provide exits for all characters. You can do that in the opening scenes of ME3.

I got everyone back alive on my first playthrough but luck played in my favor in that I correctly assumed Garrus would manage leadership of the 2nd fireteam successfully. Several players assumed Zaeed would have been a good leader, since he co-founded the Blue Suns, with unpleasant results. And unless you're a completionist-style player, you may not have bothered with enough upgrades. So I dissagree that BW made it too easy: they made it easy enough.

I also think it was a good idea to leave it entirely up to the player to determine who died and who didn't. It made the mission feel like your squadies fates hinged on your choices. If BW had made it so that certain characters HAD to die, they'd have undermined their intent of having players choices matter (even if they're not BIG CHOICES).

Bioware might just pull another kill shepard off again start from scratch approach or have events occur way off into the future where Shepard and his team no longer play a significant role anymore.

Lazarus 2.0? Doubtful... Been done before, un-necessary. Don't want ME2 survivors on mission? Let a few months/years elapse and put a bunch of new faces on the Normandy and let the player get aquainted with them at the beginning of ME3. They'll tell Shepard about what made them join up and allude to former ME2 squaddies having moved on to other misions. Send e-mails and provide cameos in accordance to which ones survived in your imported save.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Flamewielder wrote...

Eldareus wrote...
@smudboy
I am sorry for the confusion, my point was that the final mission created too many plot possiblities with surviving/deceased squadmembers and Bioware should dedicate a DLC or expansion to close the loose ends pretaining to your character and squadmates.

You're facing the same problem as ME3 for such a DLC: the DLC doesn't know who lived or died, so the DLC will have to provide exits for all characters. You can do that in the opening scenes of ME3.

I got everyone back alive on my first playthrough but luck played in my favor in that I correctly assumed Garrus would manage leadership of the 2nd fireteam successfully. Several players assumed Zaeed would have been a good leader, since he co-founded the Blue Suns, with unpleasant results. And unless you're a completionist-style player, you may not have bothered with enough upgrades. So I dissagree that BW made it too easy: they made it easy enough.

I guess it's just who I am, but there was no way I was going to pass up any upgrade to the ship when it was clear I was soon going to charge headlong into the unknown through a ship-eating mass relay. 

As for the leader for the second fire-team, well, Miranda is too polarizing; Zaeed tells all these stories about people in his squads dying; most others don't have combat command experience.  Garrus struck me as the obvious choice.

The ventilation shaft assignment screams Kasumi... it combines tech with infiltration.