145 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

(1) As a rule, I prefer imperfect outcomes, but I can't always bring myself to kill someone.

(2) I want to know how my team members' stories continue in ME3, and I want them to continue in a significant way. Since the LI characters have the highest chances of coming back, I tend to keep them alive even if I don't like them much.

(3) There are characters I don't like, but I feel my Shepard acts stupid if I kill them in the suicide mission. I dislike playing a stupid Shepard much more than I dislike any of the team members.

For these reasons, in most of my games everyone survives. I have three games with everyone alive, two games with everyone but one alive and one game with three alive. The latter was painful, I don't think I'll repeat that with my remaining two Shepards.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 30 octobre 2010 - 02:41 .

[FireEye]

No, but having to think through and decide pretty early in the game who lives and who dies is problematic for me. I wish it had some random variable attached that made it unwinnable without a few indeterminable casualties at least, and then the suicide mission could have impact but I wouldn't have to plan it out beforehand.

[Cyberfrog81]

My "main" Shepard did, and pulled it off.

After that, I've had Shepards make bad decisions all over the place, for the sake of variety. I wouldn't obsess over the characters too much with regards to ME3 - remember that they were recruited for the (apparently) suicidal attack on the Collectors, and even if they survive I assume not all of the loyalties extend beyond that. Personal preference would be to get at least Mordin and Grunt back, but... I think I'm fine with an all-new team, with significant cameos here and there. I'd try to lower the expectations enough so that when you do get extra content due to your actions in ME2, it  is a pleasant little surprise rather than "OMG, THAT'S IT?!?!?"

Modifié par Cyberfrog81, 30 octobre 2010 - 06:05 .

[Locutus_of_BORG]

I don't think I really 'need' everyone to survive ME3, but I would like everyone who survived ME2 to be present in ME3.



I guess if Thane only had a year to live in ME2, he could possibly die early off or be bedridden in ME3. I can't imagine ME2 's storyline spanning much longer than a few months, nor ME3 taking place too long after.

[Unwise Wisdom]

The only squadmates that MUST survive in my game, are Garrus, Tali and legion. Not that I want the others to die, but I don't care about them as much.

[SmokeyPSD]

well in my canon playthrough everyone has survived. I consider that fine. they were all loyal and we all fought against the odds. I found all the characters interesting in their own way and I think new recruits will only swell the ranks from 2, not really replace dead ones.



I will however be interested to make another go at making as small amount as possible survive. Make for not just a dire experience for ME2 but it'll be great for ME3.



It's awesome to have a thread startup with just no seething bitterness and sniping toward ME2 startup right from the beginning too...

[gamenut4000]

Hello there. I noticed the article and I don't know if it will help. The reason squad mates die is because there is a defense value that squad member bring to the end battle. Here is my link and information.



http://masseffect.wi...Suicide_Mission



Here it says this: The entire group will survive as long as the combined defensive skill is high enough, otherwise the game picks a squad member to die based on the scenario of who was left behind and how loyal the group members are. (Squad members who are not loyal are most likely to survive here than anywhere else, provided the group's collective defense skill is high enough, although they will be the first to die if the skill is not.) Leaving behind two strong defenders like Garrus, Grunt, or Zaeed should suffice, provided you haven't lost too many people.



Note: The order squad members die is as follows: any non-loyal squad members, Mordin, Tali, Kasumi, Jack, Miranda, Jacob, Garrus, Samara/Morinth, Legion, Thane, Zaeed, Grunt

[Biotic Flash Kick]

The only people I want to survive are Grunt, Miranda, Garrus, Samara, Thane [sorta] and Legion.

[pf17456]

glasgoo21 wrote...
Wondering what your view is on this matter, Do you want all those members you care less about to go trough and 'annoy' you once again in ME3? Or do you fear them not surviving will affect ME3 to much in order to get a Happy Ending?<_<

My 'fear' is that Bioware will back down on it's statements about consequences and cater to players who made poor choices.
While I can agree that some squad members were more useful and more entertaining than others they all were nevertheless part of the team.
I think it's an assumption that Bioware will replace any lost squadmember. Why should they ? Depending on the choices one makes it is possible to end the game with everyone surviving. If Bioware replaces non surviving team members aren't they simply rewarding failure ? It's like someone gives you a present you don't particularly like so you break it and expect them to get you another.
My feeling about this is that if a player looses a squad member then that player should play the game short a team member. Should Bioware decide to replace lost squadmates then I think they should be replaced by inferior characters with less abilities, like trading Jacob for Niftu cal.

The only way I could see replacing a squadmember with a comparable alternative would be if a team member went on a game related assignment or mission like Tali getting the Migrant Fleet on board to fight the Reapers.

Modifié par pf17456, 30 octobre 2010 - 05:33 .

[Aedan_Cousland]

GodWood wrote...

I wanted some characters to die purely for dramatic reasons but for that to happen I'd have to make some pretty stupid decisions thus breaking character.
So in my canon everyone lives.

This was my biggest complaint about ME2. You either have to skip content or make the wrong tactical decisions to lose squadmates. If you are a completionist and make the right tactical decisions, everyone gets through unscathed.

Hopefully in ME3 it will no longer be possible to get everyone through unscathed, and we'll be faced with a Virmire or three. There should be times when you lose people even if you make the right tactical decisions. That is the reality of combat.

[mineralica]

marshalleck wrote...

I didn't want Liara to survive, but she has plot armor. Sigh.

My biggest complain about deaths in ME2. Why everyone except Liara can die?

About replacements - I don't think every dead person will be changed. So people who possibly will be are important for plot or ship: Mordin, Legion, maybe Tali and Grunt. Every change will be like Wrex/Wreav - letter interesting and loyal.

[Evelinessa]

There are squadmates I don't really like but I won't kill them off. Everytime I finish the game I will keep all squadmates alive because:

1) If I kill any of the squadmates then I will have less content for ME3 and I want to have as complete an experience as possible.

2) I'm hoping that the ME2 squadmates will become squadmates in ME3. I don't want to spend another game building a team when we already have the best of the best. Plus, I'm just really attached to these characters now.

3) I'm not mean enough to intentionally kill a character. Even if I don't like them that much.

I hope all the ME1 and ME2 LIs come back as squadmates at least. But if there is one character I have to have come back then that would be Garrus.

[Oblarg]

Lord Nicholai wrote...

Oblarg wrote...

And then it turns out that you just so happens that the base is so poorly defended that you and your frigate can destroy the entire thing with relatively no resistance.

True, the base was so poorly defended that it required a reaper IFF to get through the only Mass Relay leading to it.

Oh yes, about that IFF, the reapers just left one of their dead lying around because obviously that's a smart thing to do.

Oh, and once you get it you don't study it or try to duplicate it, nah, you hook it directly up to your ship because obviously you're commander ****ing shepard and logic won't stop you from being a badass!

The entire plot is absurd to the point of breaking immersion at times.

[Bourne Endeavor]

pf17456 wrote...

glasgoo21 wrote...
Wondering what your view is on this matter, Do you want all those members you care less about to go trough and 'annoy' you once again in ME3? Or do you fear them not surviving will affect ME3 to much in order to get a Happy Ending?<_<

My 'fear' is that Bioware will back down on it's statements about consequences and cater to players who made poor choices.
While I can agree that some squad members were more useful and more entertaining than others they all were nevertheless part of the team.
I think it's an assumption that Bioware will replace any lost squadmember. Why should they ? Depending on the choices one makes it is possible to end the game with everyone surviving. If Bioware replaces non surviving team members aren't they simply rewarding failure ? It's like someone gives you a present you don't particularly like so you break it and expect them to get you another.
My feeling about this is that if a player looses a squad member then that player should play the game short a team member. Should Bioware decide to replace lost squadmates then I think they should be replaced by inferior characters with less abilities, like trading Jacob for Niftu cal.

The only way I could see replacing a squadmember with a comparable alternative would be if a team member went on a game related assignment or mission like Tali getting the Migrant Fleet on board to fight the Reapers.

We are in agreement both on what Bioware will unfortunately cater towards and what should be done. What is irksome about the potential loss of the characters is you essentially have to go out of your way to kill them. It is not as though everyone who never picked up the strategy guide will be crying in misery, incapable of saving their squad. It is exceptionally simplistic and even on a first attempt, you can survive with everyone. Nevertheless, ME3 is being designed as a standalone title, which is counterproductive to being a proper sequel.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I have yet to do a playthrough where someone doesn't make it. While it may add drama, I actually think it's ultimately pointless.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 30 octobre 2010 - 06:38 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

No. They don't need to die, but some squad-members I would rather see not return for ME2.

[F1sker]

I'm currently doing my 5th playthrough playing as a Female Renegade Shepard and I'm pretty sure Jacob is going to die closing that door.

[Fiery Phoenix]

After reading more posts in here, it's worth voicing my opinion on this. Effectively, there are two ways the suicide mission could plausibly end; entire team alive, or part of the team alive. In the former case, it's only fair that you get something out of every one of those surviving squadmates in ME3. In the latter case, for every KIA squad-mate, you simply get nothing and accept to live with the consequences.



It has been said that faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we can't or don't see. I realize this may not be the case at all, given the whole stand-alone nonsense for the sake of those ever-important people that plan to start a trilogy backwards. But I like to believe that BioWare are better than THAT.

[Nightwriter]

glasgoo21 wrote...

So this time, screw Thane, screw Miranda, screw Zaeed and I might even get Grunt killed. Really hope that ME3 provides me with better replacements for them as personaly they do not have an added value to my personal experience.

I don't like this part. I want you to take this part out and give me a new part to replace it, a better part. It would bring added value to my personal experience of this thread.

This was not a nasty message because there is a bunny in it:



Hugs and kisses, Nightwriter.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 30 octobre 2010 - 07:49 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Awww! Give me that bunny already! I would totally kiss it!

[fongiel24]

For dramatic effect, I'd rather not have everybody survive. In a supposed "suicide mission", I'd expect at least 50% casualties. Anything less and the idea that this is a "suicide mission" becomes laughable. The problem is that if you asked me to kill 50% of my crew, I wouldn't know who I'd be willing to get rid of. As much as I dislike some of them, I don't want to kill them.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I think Virmire qualifies more as a suicide mission than, well, the suicide mission.



Both are epic missions that I absolutely loved, but one of them happens to have more drama and meaning than the other.

[Nightwriter]

I think the issue is a bit moot at this point, though.

The implausibility of everyone surviving the suicide mission is something that can't be fixed now that the game is out.

But since it is already out, I think they owe it to players (yes, I know "owe" is a dangerous word) to have our effort to save everyone mean something. I saved them because I want them alive and around for ME3. If they're not, what did I save them for?