927 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

Oh my God, Wittand25, are you serious?

If the Migrant Fleet gets blown up (a universal plot event), Tali couldn't possibly say anything about it because she can potentially be dead? Her attitude can't completely change, her dialogue can't reflect her grief, and her commentary during in-mission convos can't add a bit of sting due to her general pissiness about the fact that she's one of a very small handful of survivors?  Oh, and the rest of the crew can't be like, "wow, bummer, dude?" a la Ash/Kaidan in ME1 when reflecting on plot events?  One can't drop a line about feeling really sorry for Tali?

Seriously. Your lack of creativity disturbs me.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 18 février 2011 - 06:43 .

[Wittand25]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Oh my God, Wittand25, are you serious?

If the Migrant Fleet gets blown up (a universal plot event), Tali couldn't possibly say anything about it because she can potentially be dead? Her attitude can't completely change, her dialogue can't reflect her grief, and her commentary during in-mission convos can't add a bit of sting due to her general pissiness about the fact that she's one of a very small handful of survivors?  Oh, and the rest of the crew can't be like, "wow, bummer, dude?" a la Ash/Kaidan in ME1 when reflecting on plot events?  One can't drop a line about feeling really sorry for Tali?

Seriously. Your lack of creativity disturbs me.

Yes we saw how well this was done in ME2.
And I did not talk about a short "OMG my home got blown up,I am devastated lets get back to business" and that is all you would get. I am talking about conversations like you had after the plot missions in ME1.
It is unreasonable that Bioware will plan for all eventualities and provide content for all possible imports. So all returning squad-members will not interact and their reaction to Tali´s grief will be non existent.
So since Tali and everyone else can end up dead in ME2 the scenario you gave would be extremely unsatisfying (in addition to be cheesy as hell and an absolute anti-climax to the story of the Quarians so far) because non of the other team-members would react to the scenario you described.

Also why are you so worried that new team-members would require new recruitment and new loyalty missions? No other Bioware game including ME1 had those before and apart from a lack of both creativity and memory I do not see any reason to expect that ME3´s structure would be a copy of ME2´s unless the whole team comes back.

[AkiKishi]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
]
Yes, they were great, but that's just the thing--it is incedibly lame to pull the same stunt twice.  I am pretty sure you don't want to do ME2 over again.

 

Blame the story structure.  Bioware got into too many schenanigans introducing ten new characters.  Add ten more, and they all suffer.

 

PRECISELY.  Bioware made a mighty fine batch, and ditching them would be a waste.  I don't care if an all-new team eclipses the old in awesomeness; it would still be taking the easy way out, kicking continuity in the balls, and pissing in their own fanbase.

I am NOT against new characters; I simply believe it is best to not introduce so damn many again.  While I love the ME2 cast, we blew so much time on introductions that the core plot was somewhat neglected.  Bring back a few of the old guys, and we can skip that many recruitment missions.  Honestly, what they should have done was split the cast in half, saving a few of these guys for ME3.  Otherwise, the cast gets too big.

What I'd honestly like to see is a good mix of returns, Wrex-style cameos, and temporary squadmates.  One or two very short encounters would be fine as well, since there ARE twelve of them, so long as they are well done.  I was okay with Wrex not rejoining the squad because the reunion was great, plus I already had Garrus and Tali.  I was pissed about the VS and Liara, but Shadow Broker fixed up our blue friend.  The VS?  Not so much.  Royal suckage.  Doing something like that again would be suicide.

Now, you were worried earlier about balance--what if the only survivors in your save are the ones that happen to cameo, or their powers overlap?  A small amount of new guys could easily cover your bases--you could do it with two, even, if they had a power setup similar to Miranda/Jacob or Ash/Kaidan.  However, anything more than six newcomers would be way too much--that makes a total of 21 goddam squadmates (23 if you count Morinth or the other VS) across three games.  That's a pretty big cast, even for a trilogy.  Best to not go over that, regardless of who comes back.

Look at it this way: returning characters would preserve a sense of continuity, keep the fans happy, and earn BW points as one of the most dedicated and innovative developers out there (since they overcame the SM hurdle).  However, people who happen to have wiped out half their squad, while missing out on content (that they probably didn't want), won't have to deal with an unbalanced team or epic loneliness because the new guys will give them a small, tightly-knit, cohesive squad.  The "default" save could throw entirely new players a bone by including at leat a coupe of the new guys, striking a balance between cutting content and overwhelming the poor little noob.  As for the squaddies that did get cameo'd, their new roles would be satisfactory enough that fans, for the most part, wouldn't get their undies in a bundle (so long as another Horizon is avoided).

Everyone wins.

EDIT: And yes, character development can still take place in a plot-centric story.  For example, Earth gets blown up.  How would your human squadmates react?  How would it change them?

Would I be doing ME2 over more with the same squad I had in ME2? or with a totally new squad ? If you mean do I want to avoid gathering a new squad? Does not bother me at all I need to do it in every new RPG I play anyway.

New characters have the benifit of being able to write the plot around them. You see this in ME1 with Tali being key to actually advancing the plot because of her role.
Of course you can do it with returning characters too, only ME2 left a huge problem. Any of those characters could be dead. That makes using a new cast easier since it totally eliminates that problem.

Well the blame is Biowares for making everyone killable and thus creating these problems.The recruitment missions are more to do with ME2's design. You could just as easily pick up new characters during the main plot.
Again, the problem with introducing a "few" new characters is you have no idea what roles they will be required to cover because there is no fixed outcome of who is dead. One of each class sounds ideal. But unless they only appear to replace dead people (which limits their plot potential uses). Thats going to be a squad of 18.  

I'm worried about a number of things, but they all tend to be mitagated with a new cast.

[CroGamer002]

Geez, ZULU is less pessimistic then you 2 guys and he's also at least creative.

Modifié par Mesina2, 18 février 2011 - 07:15 .

[AkiKishi]

Mesina2 wrote...

Geez, ZULU is less pessimistic then you 2 guys and he's also at least creative.

Hope for the best plan for the worst.
Why do I think you will be one of the most vocal complainers if they try to include the 12 ME2 crew and end up doing a K/A on them?

"Expectations are the worst thing you can bring to anything". -Bob

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 février 2011 - 07:18 .

[naledgeborn]

They wouldn't have green lit the SM without alternate ending (Shepard's death). No Shepard, no ME3 (for that one at least). Same with squad members. You survived you're in. You're dead you're out. It's simple really.

[CroGamer002]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

Geez, ZULU is less pessimistic then you 2 guys and he's also at least creative.

Hope for the best plan for the worst.
Why do I think you will be one of the most vocal complainers if they try to include the 12 ME2 crew and end up doing a K/A on them?

I'll laugh my ass of once ME3 shows up with most of ME2 crew.
I'll remember you 2.



Also believe me, I won't be the loudest nor among the loudest.
And that will be bad thing for Bioware nerfing out surviving ME2 characters since I then wasted my time doing most of their loyalties?

[CroGamer002]

naledgeborn wrote...

They wouldn't have green lit the SM without alternate ending (Shepard's death). No Shepard, no ME3 (for that one at least). Same with squad members. You survived you're in. You're dead you're out. It's simple really.

Simply put but correct.

[AkiKishi]

Mesina2 wrote...

I'll laugh my ass of once ME3 shows up with most of ME2 crew.
I'll remember you 2.

Why ? If they are done well I'll be quite happy and if they are done badly I don't either of us will find it very amusing.

naledgeborn wrote...

They wouldn't have green lit the SM without alternate ending (Shepard's death). No Shepard, no ME3 (for that one at least). Same with squad members. You survived you're in. You're dead you're out. It's simple really.

I can't verify this since I've never read the books, but apparently at least a year passes between ME2 and what would be the start of ME3.

Why would you not just get replacements? 

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 février 2011 - 07:28 .

[AdmiralCheez]

@Wittand25: It is not that hard to write and record dialogue. Seriously. Look at all the stuff they include that can be easily skipped--some of that stuff is really high-quality, but a lot of players don't even get to experience it. Look at all the endings to Tali's loyalty mission. Look at the little snippets they threw in for Garrus about the old days and such when it is fairly easy to not recruit him in ME1. ME2 may have had its shortcomings, but those can be fixed. Stop acting like features can't be improved upon, added, or refined. And yes, the conversations in ME2 were as in-depth as in ME1; the only problem was that there were so few core missions to comment on that they didn't even bother. As for my example, it was only an example. I'm illustrating a point--characters, even returning ones, can react to plot events very strongly, especially if it's personal to them. This reaction can carry out through the game, resulting in--gasp!--character development.



And honestly, enough with the "too many variables!" song and dance. Bioware probably planned ahead and knows how to handle it. They don't have to disappoint their fans just because it happens to be the easiest way out.



I'm pretty confident that ME3 won't have friggin' dossiers again. However, a return of ME2's cast won't make it the same game any more than Return of the King was the same movie as Two Towers, even though the cast remained largely the same.

[AdmiralCheez]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Why would you not just get replacements?

Because it's stupid and cheap.  Nobody wants to play a game that is stupid and cheap, and Bioware probably doesn't want to make one.

[AdmiralCheez]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Would I be doing ME2 over more with the same squad I had in ME2? or with a totally new squad ? If you mean do I want to avoid gathering a new squad? Does not bother me at all I need to do it in every new RPG I play anyway.

Returning team =/= same game over again.  Look at other trilogies: same cast for the most part, but a different story every time.

New characters have the benifit of being able to write the plot around them. You see this in ME1 with Tali being key to actually advancing the plot because of her role.
Of course you can do it with returning characters too, only ME2 left a huge problem. Any of those characters could be dead. That makes using a new cast easier since it totally eliminates that problem.

I'm sorry, but since when does every single character have to be a plot device?  Is that the only purpose they serve--to advance the plot?  There's no such thing as flavor?  Comedy?  Support?

My God.  That's like eating two slices of bread with nothing on them as opposed to a sandwich: BORING AND UNSATISFYING.  Also, empty carbs.

And again, I repeat: EASIEST SOLUTION =/= BEST SOLUTION.  It would have been EASIER to have made Mass Effect a first-person shooter with only one preset character, no squadmates, and no dialogue options.  And look!  No pesky variables to worry about because everyone's playing the exact same game!

Well the blame is Biowares for making everyone killable and thus creating these problems.The recruitment missions are more to do with ME2's design. You could just as easily pick up new characters during the main plot.

I would like that.  The dossiers were cute, but I don't want to do it again.

But how does picking up new guys along the way prevent old characters from coming back?  Did the new Tech Guy call shotgun on the engine room?

Again, the problem with introducing a "few" new characters is you have no idea what roles they will be required to cover because there is no fixed outcome of who is dead. One of each class sounds ideal. But unless they only appear to replace dead people (which limits their plot potential uses). Thats going to be a squad of 18.

Yes you would.  Character X gives you data on the Reapers.  Character Y knows how to get to Planet Plot Device.  Character Z does something absurdly heroic and saves the day.  Meanwhile, Garrus/Miranda provides advice (not plot-essential, but helpful), and Mordin/Tali gives you a discount on new research (again, non-essential but helpful).  Everyone aboard is able to contribute to the mission, reflect on plot events, and change and grow as characters as the story progresses.

And no, new guys would not "replace" the old ones.  As for me, a squad of even frickin' 21 (if EVERYBODY returns) is, while huge, perfectly fine since it gives me more combat options and more to discover on my next playthrough.  But alas, that's still a gynormous number.  Perhaps a little fat trimming around the edges is necessary, but don't take off all the meat and just leave the bone.

On a personal note, I'd really rather have goddam Jacob be the only one to come back than none at all.

I'm worried about a number of things, but they all tend to be mitagated with a new cast.

And an entirely new cast is the thing I'm most worried about.

[AkiKishi]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Would I be doing ME2 over more with the same squad I had in ME2? or with a totally new squad ? If you mean do I want to avoid gathering a new squad? Does not bother me at all I need to do it in every new RPG I play anyway.

Returning team =/= same game over again.  Look at other trilogies: same cast for the most part, but a different story every time.

New characters have the benifit of being able to write the plot around them. You see this in ME1 with Tali being key to actually advancing the plot because of her role.
Of course you can do it with returning characters too, only ME2 left a huge problem. Any of those characters could be dead. That makes using a new cast easier since it totally eliminates that problem.

I'm sorry, but since when does every single character have to be a plot device?  Is that the only purpose they serve--to advance the plot?  There's no such thing as flavor?  Comedy?  Support?

My God.  That's like eating two slices of bread with nothing on them as opposed to a sandwich: BORING AND UNSATISFYING.  Also, empty carbs.

And again, I repeat: EASIEST SOLUTION =/= BEST SOLUTION.  It would have been EASIER to have made Mass Effect a first-person shooter with only one preset character, no squadmates, and no dialogue options.  And look!  No pesky variables to worry about because everyone's playing the exact same game!

Well the blame is Biowares for making everyone killable and thus creating these problems.The recruitment missions are more to do with ME2's design. You could just as easily pick up new characters during the main plot.

I would like that.  The dossiers were cute, but I don't want to do it again.

But how does picking up new guys along the way prevent old characters from coming back?  Did the new Tech Guy call shotgun on the engine room?

Again, the problem with introducing a "few" new characters is you have no idea what roles they will be required to cover because there is no fixed outcome of who is dead. One of each class sounds ideal. But unless they only appear to replace dead people (which limits their plot potential uses). Thats going to be a squad of 18.

Yes you would.  Character X gives you data on the Reapers.  Character Y knows how to get to Planet Plot Device.  Character Z does something absurdly heroic and saves the day.  Meanwhile, Garrus/Miranda provides advice (not plot-essential, but helpful), and Mordin/Tali gives you a discount on new research (again, non-essential but helpful).  Everyone aboard is able to contribute to the mission, reflect on plot events, and change and grow as characters as the story progresses.

And no, new guys would not "replace" the old ones.  As for me, a squad of even frickin' 21 (if EVERYBODY returns) is, while huge, perfectly fine since it gives me more combat options and more to discover on my next playthrough.  But alas, that's still a gynormous number.  Perhaps a little fat trimming around the edges is necessary, but don't take off all the meat and just leave the bone.

On a personal note, I'd really rather have goddam Jacob be the only one to come back than none at all.

I'm worried about a number of things, but they all tend to be mitagated with a new cast.

And an entirely new cast is the thing I'm most worried about.

I'd really like to agree with you then I read stuff like this.

AdmiralCheez wrote...
And honestly, enough with the "too many variables!" song and dance. Bioware probably planned ahead and knows how to handle it. They don't have to disappoint their fans just because it happens to be the easiest way out.
.

And it reminds me just how few variables were involved with A/K compared to how many will be involved with the ME2 crew. Did they not plan ahead for ME2? 

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 février 2011 - 08:02 .

[AdmiralCheez]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'd really like to agree with you then I read stuff like this.

So... you approve?  Or you're being sarcastic and pointing out that I'm being kind of a dick?

*scratches head* I think you think I'm making good points, but I'm not sure.

Either way, if this is a positive resonse: thanks!  I do my best to make legitimate arguments and not just b*tch (although there is more than adequate b*tching).  I definitely don't expect you to recant your position or anything, since I completely understand the pessimist philosophy.  I just don't roll that way, you know?  I enjoy having things to look forward to, even if it'll kick my ass later.

And it reminds me just how few variables were involved with A/K compared to how many will be involved with the ME2 crew. Did they not plan ahead for ME2?

You know, the more I think about it, the more it looks like Horizon was just a placeholder, a la the rachni queen's message.  You know, Bioware's way of saying, "Hey, guys, we're saving this for ME3, mmkay?"

Because that sucked pretty hard.  There's no way they'd leave it at that and not resolve it later.  I don't even like Kaishley, but if that particular subplot is not adequately tied up in the future, preferrably in a most glorious and kickass fashion, I will personally slap Casey Hudson across the face.

Come to think of it, BW did mention that the VS wasn't recruitable because (s)he had a confirmed role in ME3...  Probably one of those plot-essential ones that a dead guy couldn't pull off.  As opposed to, you know, helpful advice, feedback, discounts, and an extra gun on the field.

[AkiKishi]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'd really like to agree with you then I read stuff like this.

So... you approve?  Or you're being sarcastic and pointing out that I'm being kind of a dick?

*scratches head* I think you think I'm making good points, but I'm not sure.

Either way, if this is a positive resonse: thanks!  I do my best to make legitimate arguments and not just b*tch (although there is more than adequate b*tching).  I definitely don't expect you to recant your position or anything, since I completely understand the pessimist philosophy.  I just don't roll that way, you know?  I enjoy having things to look forward to, even if it'll kick my ass later.

And it reminds me just how few variables were involved with A/K compared to how many will be involved with the ME2 crew. Did they not plan ahead for ME2?

You know, the more I think about it, the more it looks like Horizon was just a placeholder, a la the rachni queen's message.  You know, Bioware's way of saying, "Hey, guys, we're saving this for ME3, mmkay?"

Because that sucked pretty hard.  There's no way they'd leave it at that and not resolve it later.  I don't even like Kaishley, but if that particular subplot is not adequately tied up in the future, preferrably in a most glorious and kickass fashion, I will personally slap Casey Hudson across the face.

Come to think of it, BW did mention that the VS wasn't recruitable because (s)he had a confirmed role in ME3...  Probably one of those plot-essential ones that a dead guy couldn't pull off.  As opposed to, you know, helpful advice, feedback, discounts, and an extra gun on the field.

I'm being quite sincere. The only thing that separates us really is that you have more faith in Bioware where as I prefer to go from what I already know what they are capable of and what I have seen them do well and badly.

Even if it is because of some sort of ME3 role it proves 1 of 2 things.

1. Bioware really can't handle variable outcomes.
2. They will take the lazy option.

In the great scheme of things having a unique A/K encounter would have been no real effort at all. But for some reason it never happened.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 18 février 2011 - 08:36 .

[AdmiralCheez]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I'm being quite sincere. The only thing that seperates us really is that you have more faith in Bioware where as I prefer to go from what I already know what they are capable of and what I have seen them do well and badly.

Oh yeah.  I totally expect parts of ME3 to go very badly.  As in a combination of paragon-fail (I WONT SAKRIFISE DA SOLE OF HUMANITEE!) and Boobnezia's death speech.  And glitches.  Lots of glitches.

Even if it is because of some sort of ME3 role it proves 1 of 2 things.

1. Bioware really can't handle variable outcomes.
2. They will take the lazy option.

In the great scheme of things having a unique A/K encounter would have been no real effort at all. But for some reason it never happened.

Probably #2.  But there was enough harsh feedback that they probably won't make the same mistake again.  I think that and FemShep's animations were the two easiest fixes.

BW: Lol we thought you wouldn't notice.
Fanbase: >8|

Hopefully, now that they have a little more experience with dealing with the carry-over content and know that people DO notice laziness, they won't pull any similar stunts.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 18 février 2011 - 09:02 .

[lovgreno]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Why would you not just get replacements?

Because it's stupid and cheap.  Nobody wants to play a game that is stupid and cheap, and Bioware probably doesn't want to make one.

BioWare are already working their behinds off to make their brand stand for quality. I'm sure they don't want to waste the golden opportunity they have with the potentialy glorious ending of the ME trilogy.

[Zulu_DFA]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Nobody wants to play a game that is stupid and cheap

Really? I thought everybody loved ME2...

[STG]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Nobody wants to play a game that is stupid and cheap

Really? I thought everybody loved ME2...

Wouldn't be here if we didn't.

[AdmiralCheez]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Nobody wants to play a game that is stupid and cheap

Really? I thought everybody loved ME2...

That's because it wasn't stupid and cheap.

Unlike Starcraft 2.  SUDDENLY TASSADAR IS JESUS ALSO LET'S ROB A TRAIN.

Sorry, that was uncalled for :c  Demonstrating trolling, if you will.  Take note, good people.

Point is, there are some things that are subjectively stupid and cheap, and some things that are universally stupid and cheap.

Doing something you know will ****** off 99% of your massive fanbase is stupid.  Deciding to cut a bajillion corners just because you can't stand to break a little sweat is cheap.

Universally so.

Dig it?

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 19 février 2011 - 07:08 .

[Zulu_DFA]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

SUDDENLY TASSADAR IS JESUS

I'm with Matt Horner on this one: Jimmy really shoudda cut it on Scotty Bolger's Old No.8.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

ALSO LET'S ROB A TRAIN.

It's a space western. Robbing a space train was a must.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

universally stupid and cheap.

Dig it?

Yeah. You mean the planet mining, don't you?

[AdmiralCheez]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

It's a space western. Robbing a space train was a must.

Don't make me go all smudboy on SC2's plot, because I will.

And no, it's not a space western.  At least it didn't used to be...

I remember...  Back in the 90s, when it didn't have the Hollywood flash and all the stupid gimmicks, when upgrades weren't streamlined, when the story was epic and powerful...

*sniffs* I think... *sob*  I think I'm going to go play SC1.  SC2 hurt my feelings.  It just... ruined everything...

Yeah. You mean the planet mining, don't you?

Whoever thought that one up deserves to have poo flung in his face.

Seriously.

Although it was a step up from herp-derping up a cliff for three hours.

[Zulu_DFA]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

It's a space western. Robbing a space train was a must.

Don't make me go all smudboy on SC2's plot, because I will.

I'm not stopping you, although I think it's been done already.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

And no, it's not a space western.  At least it didn't used to be...

Really? "Confederacy"... "Marshal"... All those frontier-mining-farming themes...

StarCraft had been mentioned as an example on this trope's page before SC2 was released.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

I remember...  Back in the 90s, when it didn't have the Hollywood flash and all the stupid gimmicks, when upgrades weren't streamlined, when the story was epic and powerful...

*sniffs* I think... *sob*  I think I'm going to go play SC1.  SC2 hurt my feelings.  It just... ruined everything...

Then you really don't understand what StarCraft is all about. It's really not about the plot characters. It's about space soldiers and their uneazy fates of serving in chickensh*t outfits and cauterizing target areas.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Yeah. You mean the planet mining, don't you?

Whoever thought that one up deserves to have poo flung in his face.

Seriously.

Although it was a step up from herp-derping up a cliff for three hours.

Not if you figured out how to drive the Mako. Rolling in the Mako around the Galaxy was the most enjoyable part of the game. Kinda shame BioWare took it out after joining EA, whose main shooter series features combat vehicle simulation.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 19 février 2011 - 08:42 .