2338 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

By the way, I'm not calling Hudson a liar. I'm just saying that he has a tendency to make statements that incite people to leap to conclusions. Mass Effect 3 can indeed be divergent without bringing the squad back full-time. At this point, it could mean almost anything and is proof of nothing.

He didn't cause you to expect more out of the statement. It wasn't as if the statement was open to multiple interpretations. The discussion is over. You continue to debate the evidence because your pessimistic after being disappointed from expecting too much from a simple statement Hudson made. That's your fault. You set yourself up for a disappointment. 

-Polite

[SmokePants]

xlavaina wrote...

I don't want anything more. But I think Smoke wanted a little more. I have just learned to not over think what people are saying nowadays; to not be too optimistic about quotes. 

I didn't "want more". I just thought it was funny that he referenced the one choice in the game that was bugged and didn't work properly as his example of a small consequence. It was just a horrible coincidence, but I thought it was amusing.

And his example of a large-scale consequence is whether humans or aliens run the citadel, which was completely irrelevant, as it turned out. AS IT HAD TO BE!

Modifié par SmokePants, 10 septembre 2010 - 12:04 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

xlavaina wrote...

I don't want anything more. But I think Smoke wanted a little more. I have just learned to not over think what people are saying nowadays; to not be too optimistic about quotes. 

I didn't "want more". I just thought it was funny that he referenced the one choice in the game that was bugged and didn't work properly as his example of a small consequence. It was just a horrible coincidence, but I thought it was amusing.

And his example of a large-scale consequence is whether humans or aliens run the citadel, which was completely irrelevant, as it turned out.

And how do you figure? The signs were there as he said. The Dr.'s said that Even though all of the Mass 1 choices are being pulled into Mass 2, you won't see the larger consequences of those decisions until the third game. Some choices will get smaller consequences in the second game, but the large consequences will be experienced in the third game. 

Once more, try again. 

-Polite

[SmokePants]

Did you "try again" with "same team?" No? Then I will not engage you any further. It's like trying to explain to a moth the difference between a flame and the moon.

[theelementslayer]

smudboy wrote...

If they already focused on squad, why would they focus on squad again?

How do you know it was already written?

To that end, how do you know it was already designed?

Alright I would be messing around with UDK right now but its only 8 where I am so why not discuss a bit more.

Exactly it already focused on the squad well done. Its like a trilogy is meant to do 3 things in its 3 acts.
1. Introduce the world and the threat(first act-ME1)
2. Introduce the characters that will play a big part in defeating the threat(second act-ME2)
3. Defeat the threat(third act-ME3)

Okay.  That has no relation to ME2 squads being ME3 squads.  That could mean anything.

But what other consequences are that large to recieve a mention in gaming around 2011/2012. The ME2 consequences were enough for the years of 2008-2010 but they need to get better to compete, and they will

12 characters = 12 variables.  That's what, 1000 - 12?

Alright but let me put it this way

Character status [alive|dead]
if character status=='alive'
    then load  character loyalty status, character relationship status, character morality status

ect ect, you get the point. Itll snowball. You said it yourself just the combination of them will have alot of varibles.

I fail to see what you're trying to say.

You need 2 characters for a 3 person squad. You must save 2 to be able to survive, and then export the game to ME3. Still fail to see it?

[Jaron Oberyn]

 This page needs the Post of Truth!

 It's beyond three or four dimensions, because you have all the consequences from a certain playthrough and many different things that happen and different things that happen within those. But then all those things different for a different play through and then times your class and times your gender and all these things. We're pulling in probably over a thousand variables from Mass Effect 2 into Mass Effect 3 if you're importing your save game. It's more of an organic approach where we're opportunistic about how the game can change based on those variables. So the writers have to experts in what's happened before and what choices you could have made, and then as they write the story, they find places where it would be really cool to have different things happen based on those variables.

http://www.joystiq.c...-mass-effect-2/

--------------------------------------

malevolente: I hope I'm not spoiling anything for anyone, but the devs have stated that all squadmates (and Shepard) can die at the end of ME2. Or everyone can survive. And given that Ashley or Kaidan could die in ME, wouldn't that make having a squad in ME3 of any of the squadmates from both games (except Liara) difficult? Are you still considering this option, or is an entirely new squad likely to be present in ME3? I'm sure that putting ME2 and ME squadmates on the backburner for the final installment of...



CaseyH-ME2: Yes, it's definitely difficult to continue the fiction when we allow major characters to be **bleep**ed off by player actions. But, that's part of the fun, and the impact of major consequences. One reason that the love interests were not recruitable in ME2 (but are still part of the story) is that they need to be around for the ongoing story in ME3.

http://www.giantbomb...dson/35-382636/


-------------------------------------

http://www.computera...e.php?id=258534

-------------------------------------

Our chat closed with talk about the challenges BioWare is facing in terms of delivering real choice to the player without letting the story spiral out of control.

"It has to be one or the either. Either you really let people's choices have repercussion. Or, the choice doesn't really affect things and then things end up coming back together.As we're doing parts one and two, we have a really difficult challenge in terms of creating very different outcomes and yet being able to continue the story. The good thing about the third one will be that we no longer have that constraint and things can diverge as far as we can make them go.

That actually will be our goal with the whole trilogy. [color=rgb(255, 102, 0)">To take all of the things you've done in Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 and then just let it go. ][b]I'm not worried that people will play it and think 'Oh well I missed all of this content that would have been different if I had made other choices' because what that does is make you interested in replaying it. The replay value of Mass Effect 1 was huge, but Mass Effect 2 is much more so and I think it just continues into the conclusion of the trilogy."[/color]

http://uk.xbox360.ig.../1055366p2.html

-------------------------------------

Just a couple of things that I've posted throughout the thread. Decided to post them in one post, for future reference and for present discussion.

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 10 septembre 2010 - 12:14 .

[smudboy]

theelementslayer wrote...
Exactly it already focused on the squad well done. Its like a trilogy is meant to do 3 things in its 3 acts.

Again, what's your point?

What does it being a trilogy have to do with anything?

1. Introduce the world and the threat(first act-ME1)
2. Introduce the characters that will play a big part in defeating the threat(second act-ME2)
3. Defeat the threat(third act-ME3)

Whose rules are these?  How about this?
1. Introduce the threat.
2. Learn about stopping the threat.
3. Stop the threat.

You see we can contrive any set of guidelines of effects to what a trilogy is or should be, and they still don't tell us anything as to how completely optional squadmates of high variability and states must return.

But what other consequences are that large to recieve a mention in gaming around 2011/2012. The ME2 consequences were enough for the years of 2008-2010 but they need to get better to compete, and they will

Sorry, what are you trying to say?  What consequences?

Alright but let me put it this way

Character status [alive|dead]
if character status=='alive'
    then load  character loyalty status, character relationship status, character morality status

ect ect, you get the point. Itll snowball. You said it yourself just the combination of them will have alot of varibles.

Yes, there are many variations on the variables, and many variables.  Due to sheer number, this implies simple effects to these variables.  You do not construct massive amounts of resources on a handful of highly variable factors, just because.  You need reasons and functionality on how and why, but this is only after dealing with how these characters can even be 1. alive, 2. imported, 3. recruited, 4. loyal.

You need 2 characters for a 3 person squad. You must save 2 to be able to survive, and then export the game to ME3. Still fail to see it?

This is nothing new: what exactly are you trying to say, considering those 2 can be anyone?  You could also argue those 2 characters would be needed to play all the ME2 DLC post-suicide.  The problem still persists of how your point relates to them being fully fledged squadmates.  If you're just saying "they'll be squadmates", I don't have an issue with that, which I've stated many times before, if their entire role is simply to be functional.  But I'm quite sure this is not the arguement you're selling.

Modifié par smudboy, 10 septembre 2010 - 01:11 .

[Jamer21]

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

[xlavaina]

Jamer21 wrote...

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

You make a good point. But normally we [at least] try and discuss. Smudboy has a few valid points, and a few not so valid points, just like everyone else. Though you're right, nobody will know until ME3 comes out, but posting here is enough to put our minds at ease for now, thats why people post here. 

[smudboy]

Jamer21 wrote...

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

I know exactly what to say about you.  I am extremely open to reason.  Give me sufficient evidence and an argument that supports that evidence and I'd be happy to oblige your opinion.

[theelementslayer]

Jamer21 wrote...

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

Im sorry I have to say this-though I do agree with you

SHUN THE NON BELIEVER:wizard:

[smudboy]

xlavaina wrote...
You make a good point. But normally we [at least] try and discuss. Smudboy has a few valid points, and a few not so valid points, just like everyone else. Though you're right, nobody will know until ME3 comes out, but posting here is enough to put our minds at ease for now, thats why people post here. 

You've yet to reply to my post.  What invalid points?

[Jaron Oberyn]

smudboy wrote...

Jamer21 wrote...

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

I know exactly what to say about you.  I am extremely open to reason.  Give me sufficient evidence and an argument that supports that evidence and I'd be happy to oblige your opinion.

Lol We've provided that. Look above, are you blind? You keep asking for evidence, and we keep providing evidence. But here's the ironic part - you provide absolutely none. That's what makes your argument so weak. That and your videos show your extreme pessimism.  I think you just want attention. 

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 10 septembre 2010 - 02:04 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Jamer21 wrote...

Polite is right there are lots of interviews to prove that. Smud boy I'm not sure what to say about you you clearly have some issues with ME2 all I have to do is look at the links in your sig to figure that out and I know you and smokepants are never going to listen to reason so I suggest everyone just let this thread die instead of wasting your time fighting about this until ME3 comes out.

I've let this thread die so many times. Yet it finds it's way back up here. I'm going to give it another go, seeing as Smud is going absolutely nowhere with his argument. It's been the exact same bare argument he's given since he started posting in here. 

I'll keep tabs on my Post of Truth though. Gottta love that name. 

-Polite

[Jamer21]

@ PoliteAssasin Your evidence seems to keep piling up and his stays the same. Ive read almost read all the pages and I'm going to ignore this thread from now on because this whole thread became repetitive along time ago. I might check this out in five months and see if its gone somewhere.

[alickar]

dude it is possibe they already made them they can just copy all of them to mass effect 3 its not like starting from scratch you know

[vader44]

I dont want to say this but I think hes right. I really would rather have all the characters back than have any new ones espeacially because its the final chapter but there are to many variables. If I were you id enjoy the ME2 DLC while it lasts because considering this and the possibility of multiplayer there is a likely chance ME3 will suck. And Bioware please understand I dont mean to sound like a jerk but in a rough economy I understand why you went to the Darkside(ea). I will never forgive microsoft for not fighting for you.

[wulf3n]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
CaseyH-ME2: ...One reason that the love interests were not recruitable in ME2 (but are still part of the story) is that they need to be around for the ongoing story in ME3.

-Polite

That pretty much sums everything up. Anyone that can die is going to be ultimately irrelevant. While i don't doubt all the characters will be integrated into the story in some way, their involvement will be moot at best. 

[Giggles_Manically]

I'll just leave this here:







He has about as much dialouge as any of the guys from ME2 anyway.

[theelementslayer]

wulf3n wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
CaseyH-ME2: ...One reason that the love interests were not recruitable in ME2 (but are still part of the story) is that they need to be around for the ongoing story in ME3.

-Polite

That pretty much sums everything up. Anyone that can die is going to be ultimately irrelevant. While i don't doubt all the characters will be integrated into the story in some way, their involvement will be moot at best. 

I think they did this because they had to continue the story for ME3. But after ME3 there is nothing so it doesnt matter if they die, or if they are around in the first place. There is no story needing to be fulfilled, therefore the consequences can be there. Plus as a squaddie I see them having less actual impact then as an NPC on the story so it makes more sense to me.

Whatever BW decides though Im behind them 1000000% cause LotSB just well blew me away

[wulf3n]

theelementslayer wrote...
I think they did this because they had to continue the story for ME3. But after ME3 there is nothing so it doesnt matter if they die, or if they are around in the first place.

I guess it really depends on what you believe the current state of Bioware is.
If you believe their main goal is maximum profit, then they'll probably reduce all of the killable characters to non-essential roles, with minimal content.

If you believe their main goal is to make the ultimate gaming experience the likes of which has never been seen before, in which the choices we've made have observable consequences within the world, then ME3 will be an awesome experience, effectively 2 games in one, where our choices determine which story we see in ME3.

[SmokePants]

Let's reaffirm the topic of this thread -- whether squadmates will return as squadmates in ME3 or not.  Nothing Casey Hudson has ever said proves a damn thing or settles this debate in any way. It's a pathetic lack of reasoning skills that would lead anyone to think otherwise.

Earlier, I posted a pre-ME2 quote from Hudson in which he gave an example of a "big" consequence. It turned out that it was just some graphics and PA announcements on the citadel that were different depending on whether you saved the council in ME1.

Now that he's discussing ME3, he's talking in vagueries about consequences and divergent outcomes, but he is not explaining what he means. You people are jumping to the most grandiose, incomprehensively unlikely conclusions, when it might be something as simple as a billboard being different.

Further, I find the "squadmates back as squadmates" camp's reaction -- or lack of reaction -- to the Shadow Broker DLC to be incredibly funny. Liara returning as a squadmate in ME3 was your POSTER ARGUMENT and now that looks extremely unlikely to happen.

It must be nice to live in such denial that you can force contradictory pieces of new information into your continuously mutating arguments, as if they fit with your theory all along.

But the reality of the matter is, I can take a pencil and cross off Liara, while you can't put a check mark next to any previous squadmate's  name on the roster. The score stands at Good guys - 1. Delusionists - 0.

[Bruddajakka]

SmokePants wrote...

Let's reaffirm the topic of this thread -- whether squadmates will return as squadmates in ME3 or not.  Nothing Casey Hudson has ever said proves a damn thing or settles this debate in any way. It's a pathetic lack of reasoning skills that would lead anyone to think otherwise.

Earlier, I posted a pre-ME2 quote from Hudson in which he gave an example of a "big" consequence. It turned out that it was just some graphics and PA announcements on the citadel that were different depending on whether you saved the council in ME1.

Now that he's discussing ME3, he's talking in vagueries about consequences and divergent outcomes, but he is not explaining what he means. You people are jumping to the most grandiose, incomprehensively unlikely conclusions, when it might be something as simple as a billboard being different.

Further, I find the "squadmates back as squadmates" camp's reaction -- or lack of reaction -- to the Shadow Broker DLC to be incredibly funny. Liara returning as a squadmate in ME3 was your POSTER ARGUMENT and now that looks extremely unlikely to happen.

It must be nice to live in such denial that you can force contradictory pieces of new information into your continuously mutating arguments, as if they fit with your theory all along.

But the reality of the matter is, I can take a pencil and cross off Liara, while you can't put a check mark next to any previous squadmate's  name on the roster. The score stands at Good guys - 1. Delusionists - 0.

Actually you can't. Yeah right now she's the Shadow Broker as of Lair. But that doesn't mean she won't be returning as a squad mate in ME3. There's a bunch of different things that could happen to cause her to rejoin the squad. Until ME3 is out. Nobody can one hundred percent say for sure who is, and isn't on the squad.

[Ch40sFox]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

I'll just leave this here:



He has about as much dialouge as any of the guys from ME2 anyway.

So absolutely true....

[smudboy]

Bruddajakka wrote...

Actually you can't. Yeah right now she's the Shadow Broker as of Lair. But that doesn't mean she won't be returning as a squad mate in ME3. There's a bunch of different things that could happen to cause her to rejoin the squad. Until ME3 is out. Nobody can one hundred percent say for sure who is, and isn't on the squad.

Although Smoke does have a point, the fact that Liara is still alive puts her in an argument above the ME2 squad, for the 4 reasons I constantly list.  We have a 100% guarantee Liara will survive, is loyal, and since she was a temporary squadmate in ME2, we can make a few good guesses:

1) She remains the SB.
2) She has another mission to go on with you, then goes back to being the SB.
3) She becomes a squadmate.

(1 seems the most likely, unless she works remotely, gets Feron to do it, etc.  More practical is having Feron being Liara's liaison, and potentially a squadmate.)

Temporary squadmate status is a possibility for ME2 squadmates, where they can be plot relevant in ME3.  If they die, they can have a placeholder (like Tali/Kal'Reegar) so the mission/level they go on has the same number of lines and commentary.  This also solves any inconsistencies if they aren't plot relevant, and are simply reduced to DLC.