1053 réponses à ce sujet

[Lee337]

Elite Midget wrote...

Bioware has it in Thane's History that he has less than a year to live when he's recruited. Mass Effect 3 takes place at least over a year after the events of Mass Effect 2. Thus Thane chances of living up to than are slim to none unless Bioware goes about retconning that out. Especially since Shepard has no option of convinceing Thane to get help since he might be needed again.

Also, yes. Mass Effect is Shepards story not the story of reaccureing Squaddies and Shepard.

Mass Effect 2 had a surpringly large amount of Variables for each Squaddie. Many of these Variables can't be changed no matter what you do as well and that's a pity.

Who said ME3 takes place a year later?

[Elite Midget]

You don't read the novels? Than there's that Bridgeing Comic Series beng made by Darkhorse to cover other events between ME2 and ME3....

[ADelusiveMan]

I need to get the ME novels and such. I haven't read any of them...

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Lee337 wrote...

Bioware would be crazy if they made an entire game about recruiting new people again. Or re recruiting old ones. I don't think most of the characters are likely to leave and if they do they'll be quick to go pick up.
As for Thanes incurable illness even if he doesn't get a cure, he still might survive to see the reapers. Why does he have to die before ME3? Why not during or after?

ME3 is the end of Shepards story. It might be complex with all the choices but it also means they don't have to worry about making the choices fit into the next game. ME1 and ME2 couldn't have so many choices or they'd over complicated ME3. Now all that matters is what happens in game and the ending.

True. I'd like to clarify something from my fun little exercise above - I didn't picture those missions as "dossier style" missions like in ME2. I pictured them as storyline missions where a character is picked up as part of advancing the main plot.  I didn't go into detail because I haven't been following the new DLC and I have no idea where the story is going, but I'm having fun so I'll make something up.

Elaboration: 

Now you go on your first mission. You're investigating a lost Mass Relay rumored to link Batarian Space with an area on the other side of the Perseus veil. Your research has lead you to an unregarded moon in Batarian space, where you've heard reports of slaver activity, because... you are in batarian space. While on the mission you discover that it's not a moon... it's a Mass Relay! Like Charon was in the Sol system. Turning it on will cause chaos on the planet, so you need to make sure It's abandoned.

Meet Theodore
J. Batarian. He is a Batarian. New character! If you have Jenkins in your party, he shoots and kills (or wounds) Jenkins, so that Jenkins leaves your party. If you have Miranda or Garrus in your party, they dodge the bullet.

Ted runs a batarian underground railroad station here on this moon. You help him evacuate the escaped slaves in his charge, then take him back to the ship and activate the relay. It shakes off the associated dust and frozen ice, but something's wrong... it's not activating. It's possible the Geth have turned it off from the other side. Wait, can that even be done?

You have to take Ted's escaped slaves somewhere safe, so you head back to citadel space.

Now three new missions open up. You can do either: 

1. Reaper tech research - check up on the reaper tech research being done on the Salarian homeworld, using pieces of sovereign (and possibly some pieces of the collector station, purchased on the black market), Rescue a Salarian from one of her crewmates, corrupted by a mishandling of tech [Susaee Talksfast, your new Salarian Crewmate!]

2. The Black Market - somehow, aliens are getting their hands on collector related tech, despite Cerberus having a near perfect monopoly on the source. How can this be? A secret cartel of underground merchants are paying big money to Cerberus operatives who smuggle them tech [Torbo Morgram, your new Volus Crewmate]

3. Maps, Wait! - The only race to have maps of the Perseus veil are the Quarians, and they may be mounting an attack on Geth space that could help you reach the other side of the Mass Relay, and find out if the Geth have managed to diable it. [Tali Crewmate]

Do these, and two new ones open up:

1. Beyond the Veil: venture into Gethspace (with an option to do so peacefully if you have Legion), forwarding the plot.
2. Somethingsomething Lungs. I don't know. I can't think of a good reason to go get Thane. Oh wait, yes I can! Ahem.
2. Prothean memories - Susaee Talksfast has noticed some relationship between the Hanar legends about the Enkindlers and the story of the Conduit on Ilos. Go to the Hanar homeworld to see if there is anything more you might learn from the Hanar legends, or the prothean relics there. [Recruit Thane]

These recruit missions are more akin to the Liara one in ME1 - storyline missions that happen to contain a character. I definitely agree that recruitment in ME3 will probably work more in that way.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 mars 2011 - 03:55 .

[Elite Midget]

ADelusiveMan wrote...

I need to get the ME novels and such. I haven't read any of them...

They're decent but not world changeing or anything. You can just go to the wiki and get a general idea on what happened anyway. Mostly because wiki cutz out the bloat and just lists the relevant ME information.

[ADelusiveMan]

Elite Midget wrote...

ADelusiveMan wrote...

I need to get the ME novels and such. I haven't read any of them...

They're decent but not world changeing or anything. You can just go to the wiki and get a general idea on what happened anyway. Mostly because wiki cutz out the bloat and just lists the relevant ME information.

Thanks. I think I will do that.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Elite Midget wrote...

So you approve of retconning the characters, cutting out a wide swaths of tyheir dialouge, and the such because you want them in your Squad despite none of them haveing the ability to be intergrated into the Story? You know what they call that? DLC. Better start saving because Bioware might catch on! I mean, why add in Garrus as a shell when they can sell him later as a shell since fans clearly don't care about anything othe than their presence! Bravo, I say! After all, that's the only path since they can't intergrate them into the story due to many Variables from ME2.

Retconning is only a warranted term if the character is abruptly altered despite previously established information dictating otherwise. The use of ammunition is an example of a retcon. What I had stated as a plausible scenario for Miranda is development. We know nothing of her past nor her father beyond her opinion of him. She would not even be aware of TIM's involvement in that instance.

As for integration, excluding Mordin, the entire cast was irrelevant in Mass Effect 2. The Suicide Mission makes this abundantly clear when each squad mate is interchangeable with another; the exception being an incorrect choice led to their death. The Suicide Mission was successful regardless if you lost Legion, Miranda or Garrus. Hell even Shepard did not produce a game over, albeit you cannot import that file going forward.

Kasumi and Zaeed were integrated into the game to some capacity. They only did not have a dialogue wheel and overall less content because the finalization of their characters was after the content deadline. This conundrum does not exist for ME3.

The original Mass Effect is a fairly decent example of the cast not having any direct impact to plot progression yet fulfilling a role in the story. If the game allotted for Wrex's death at an earlier junction or you simply chose not to recruit him. The Virmire seen involving him simply does not trigger. The same could be used for the ME2 cast.

You do know that Samara didn't see the Reapers right? They aren't there and Samara's code doesn't allow her to do nothing while waiting for the Reapers. Thus she'll return to her Code. Hell, she didn't do jack when Saren was about the hand the Universe over and was instead doing her Code thing. So clearly her Code dictates all unless you swears others. Unfortunately her Code only lasts for ME2 which she stated upon recruitment.

Aye, however she is aware of their existence and the impending invasion. She may have witnessed the larva form were she present to thwart the Baby-Reapminator. When she swore her original oath she had only heard of the Collectors and once evaded pursuit from their vessel. She had never engaged them personally nor had forehand knowledge beyond they existed. She made the oath to uphold justice and the Reaper threat could easily be rationalized as another indication of injustice.

She was pursuing Morinth, her life's dedication and was neither in Citadel space nor likely had any realization of Saren's intentions. The Council themselves for skeptical of the Reaper threat and no one else in the Citadel even knew of it. Why would Samara?

Variables are speculation, they're fact which was put in by Bioware. I didn't make this stuff up if you must know and these aren't even all of the Variables anyway that would push the Squaddies to leave. No, there are the general ones that even a new player would understand just fine after just one playthrough.

Finally... I like the gambling type. In the end someone will be wrong. Let's see what cards Bioware will deal. If I'm wrong than so be it but if I'm right than so be it as well. Whatever the case this issue has two sides and I will not waver, like you wont, on my views on the matter.

Whilst BioWare is intending to work from a stand alone perspective. They must adhere to their fanbase or risk potentially losing them. If the entire cast of the preceding Mass Effect games are Wrex Effect'd. I guarantee this will impact sales in a negative manner. DA2 is evident when you stray too far from what is desired, the ensuing results may be lackluster.

They could introduce two or three new characters to accommodate a new crowd and not wave aside the rest. Anyone who is only now jumping aboard will have no invested interest in Miranda or Garrus and thus could not care less about missed content involving them. If they did, they are free to purchase Mass Effect 2 and unlock this content. This is in fact an ingenious way to market what will be a two year old game. BioWare is already guaranteed their current fanbase if they do not muck up everything. So this would be an additional benefit.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Elite Midget wrote...

Bioware has never denied you a Squadmate if you're Renegade or Paragon. That's a huge piece of content there. Even so, Morinth had nowhere near the depth as Samara since she was just a secret replacement Squaddie. Hell, they even had her use Samara's voice to save time, money, and better use manpower elsewhere.

I think the reason you've been having so much trouble here is not your opinion. You are entitled to your opinion. You believe that ME3 would be a better game if there are no returning squad members at all, and that is what Bioware will do. I agree that it is impossible to determine who is right until characters are announced.

Thatsaid, while you're entitled to your own opinion, you are not simply expressing your opinion here. You are stating your opinion as fact without citing any evidence. This is what makes people argue with you... me included. It's possible this is a trap on your part, in which case... well played, sir. Well played.

You can be a perfectly good Renegade and still have all your allies. They're not punishing you for being a renegade, they're showing you the consequences of a specific decision you made. Look at Kaidan - if you let him die in ME1, he's gone forever. They also used a lot of time and manpower to make Legion, who got far less asset use if you never activated him than Wrex did if you killed him. I don't understand why you want all character-related choices in ME2 to be irrelevant in ME3. If you choose to sell Legion, that was your choice. If blowing up the Collector base blows up in my face, that's fine. If it costs me access to a collector NPC, that's fine. I'd rather it have some kind of consequence than say "Bioware shouldn't punish me for being a Paragon." 

If any of the Squaddies start getting special treatment over others despite the variables against them than it would just cause more problems down the road. I know I would be hugely miffed if Garrus and Tali return, despite their killable status and other variables, yet no one else does. It would cause a huge backlash even larger than no one returning.

Wanna know why? Because Fans get attached to their Favorite characters. Thus the logically scenerio would be a bunch of fans explodeing in anger over the fact that the Tali and Garrus are in all 3 games yet everyone else was dropped off. After all, such special treatment is messed up, full of bias, and only addresses a minority of fans.

Yes, Garrus and Tali fans combined are smaller than the rest of the Other characters fans. Thus they would be the minority.

It would also make ME2 people wonder why they bothered to romance anyone but Garrus and Tali in that scenerio as well. Basically, by allowing at least Garrus and Tali to return, despite the many variables against them, you would be opening a whole new Can of Rage.

I disagree strongly, and have seen a great deal of evidence to the contrary.

I want to remind you that my favorite character will probably never  be playable again, as a consequence of other people's actions in ME1 (Wrex). In nearly every scenario I've written up here, I've proposed that my new favorite character will be dead or an NPC (Mordin).  I was sad that my favored love interest wasn't playable this game, and his scene was lame and depressing (Kaidan). When rating characters from ME1, Garrus was a distant third. Wrex was the most popular squad mate in ME1. He even won an award for "best sidekick" in XBox Magazine. I loved that dude, and he is stil my favorite space bro. I was disappointed that he wasn't back, but I understood it.

Also, if you'll notice, in my little write-up above, I made sure to include 3 romance options: the VS, and the two most popular LIs from ME2 per gender (based on a few fan surveys I saw, Bioware has internal data and could obviously draw its own conclusions). I didn't presume to do Liara 'cause I assume she'll be special character fodder. I'd prefer to include all the ME2 love interests, but I will admit it's probably not feasible to do so. As Meatloaf once said... two out of three ain't bad.

I can tell you that I, personally, would rather have any single ME2 character back than have none of them back. I will admit I would be pretty upset if they picked one character to bring back and it was my least favorite character, but I wouldn't be upset at all if two characters came back and one was my least favorite character and one was in my top 5. Heck, my four least favorite squadmates were Jacob, Miranda, Zaeed, and Samara. I'd still rather have all four of them back and no one else than start from scratch. So the assumptions you are making about the consensus fan reaction have a weak foundation, to say the least.

I'd also like to discuss a word you've been using frequently here: bias. Bias is a tendency to favor one thing over another, with a strong implication that the person displaying bias is blinded by their default assumptions and is not considering the problem reasonably. The term "bias" should be used when you think that a default assumption has kept someone from rationally considering the situation.

I will give an example of when someone can make a seemingly "unfair" choice without be biased. I like Sleeping Beauty, and I hate Snow White. Still, I don't think it's biased for Disney to say "You know what, I think we should put Snow White on this coffee mug instead of Sleeping Beauty, because Snow White historically sells better." Disney isn't being biased here, they are carefully considering all factors and making a decision. It happens to favor Snow White fans over Sleeping Beauty fans, and it may feel "unfair" to me, but it's not any more unfair than the fact that they don't put that cute white-haired girl from Atlantis on anything ever because her movie wasn't successful. You can't go to Disney and say "If you are going to make a line of Princess goods you have to include all princesses on every incarnation of the line, otherwise you're being biased." 

The best example of this is Shepard himself. If all killable characters must not be playable in the next game, then SHEPARD must also not be playable in the next game, to be totally "fair." Why does Shepard get special treatment? It's also not fair to those players who let their Shepard die - Shepard is killable, thus he must be treated the same as any other character. For some reason, their saves can't be loaded to the next game? That is biased against them! Of course, this is ridiculous on its face. Shep needs to be in the next game, people are attatched to their Shepard. But this shows that all variables are not created equal, when it comes to future development focus. Bioware has obviously already decided that Shepard will be the main character of ME3. Having Miranda or Garrus would be just as biased as having Shepard. Bioware has already decided to either choose (or be biased toward) the concept of a living Shepard, it's only fair to allow them to make other similar choices (or have other, similar biases), if they think it will benefit the story. Would you have preferred if they made any save that Miranda died in untransferrable to the next game? That way, her survial would be just as "unbiased" as Shepard's.

Making a choice to feature a popular character in a game, even if other people like other characters more, isn't biased. If it is, every game that has ever been made in the history of all time is biased. Every time they make a mario game that doesn't include Mallow, Geno, and Waluigi, they're being biased. If they make a Zelda game where Link is playable and Zelda isn't, they're being biased. If they make a final fantasy that doesn't involve the Sphere Grid, they're being biased. If they make a Call of Duty game that doesn't include zombies, they're being biased. If they make one that DOES include Zombies, they are also being biased.

Every choice that some people are unhappy with is not a bias. It's a design decision. You can think that one design decision is better than another - that's your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But you can't declare decisions you disagree with biased, and ones you agree with "fair." You can say it would feel unfair, but that's different. I can totally sympathize with that. If Jacob comes back for ME3 and neither Kaidan nor Garrus do, it will feel unfair to me. But I cannot legitimately argue that it is fundamentally, factually, or logically more unfair than any other design decision.

Finally... I like the gambling type. In the end someone will be wrong. Let's see what cards Bioware will deal. If I'm wrong than so be it but if I'm right than so be it as well. Whatever the case this issue has two sides and I will not waver, like you wont, on my views on the matter.

It's fine for you to not waver on your views. The problem isn't your unwavering-ness, it's your tendency to present your opinions as if they were facts, and the fact that you seem to have some... unconventional definitions for standard English words.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 mars 2011 - 11:53 .

[Akizora]

Opinions may not be facts but creating variables for 10 returning or potentially returning squadmates as well as alternative recruitments for each one in case they are dead would be resource-heavy. Cutting a massive chunk of content for players who might have lost 4-5 squadmembers is also not something that Bioware would do.

If squadmembers from ME2 comes back, I believe they will choose the most popular ones that they think can fullfill an actual role and not just stand in the background calibrating engines...Yes I took a shot at Garrus At least Tali is setting up a conflict for ME3.

Modifié par Akizora, 26 mars 2011 - 12:58 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Akizora wrote...

Opinions may not be facts but creating variables for 10 returning or potentially returning squadmates as well as alternative recruitments for each one in case they are dead would be resource-heavy. Cutting a massive chunk of content for players who might have lost 4-5 squadmembers is also not something that Bioware would do.

If squadmembers from ME2 comes back, I believe they will choose the most popular ones that they think can fullfill an actual role and not just stand in the background calibrating engines...Yes I took a shot at Garrus At least Tali is setting up a conflict for ME3.

Go a few pages back, I wrote a detailed explanation of how you could incorporate 6 ME2 squadmates, your Virmire Survivor, and 3 new characters (for a total of 10 characters again) with minimal resource use.

Also, there's a statistic that a lot of people are neglecting. It's understandable, because it's not a widely known stat, but Bioware released information sating that, on average, 15 percent of the squad dies on the suicide mission.

Assuming that the average player ended the game with 10 characters (I'm assuming that the people who got the DLC average out vs. the people who only gathered the required 8 characters), and assuming all squadmates had an equal chance of dying (I'm just doing this because it makes the math easier. I'm bad at math). If Bioware includes a given squad member in content for the new game, (if they make Miranda recruitable, for instance) only 1.5% of all players importing a saved game with miss that content. People who lost five or six characters are a very, very small minority.  Probably fewer than 5% of players lost more than five characters (and that estimate is extremely generous), and if 6 characters are choosen to recur... the percentage of players who lost all the characters chosen to recur should be almost infinitesimally low.

(This is especially true if Miranda is chosen to recur and Mordin is left off, as I proposed. Guides to the Suicide mission state that Mordin dies easily, so I'd assume that a disproportionate number of characters lost him. In contrast, Miranda can survive one of the key death situations even if she is not loyal, so I am assuming she has a higher survival number. However things are, Bioware has all the data and can make decisions based on surivial rates, if they want to.)

Let's just say this: the number of people who romanced Jacob in ME3 is probably roughly eqivalent to the number of people who lost six squadmates.

Nobody thinks all 10 or 12 will be back. Bioware has implied heavily that all 10 will not be back. I've also seen references to a quote from Bioware that implies that doing a LOT worse than average on the suicice mission may hurt you in ME3, but I don't have a citation for that. (if anyone else does, I'd appreciate it).

In my little write-up I tried to use a mix of character popularity estimates, story-relatedness, and ease of killing them on the mission to pick who to let go, dropping Zaeed, Kasumi, Samara, Jacob, Mordin, and Jack. Garrus and Miranda live because they are popular. I would prefer to have Mordin, myself, but there you go. I consider Thane on the "popularity and plot relevance bubble," I just put him in as a survivor for gender romance option parity, because Jacob is statistically less popular and has no more plot relevance than Thane.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 mars 2011 - 01:34 .

[Akizora]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Akizora wrote...

Opinions may not be facts but creating variables for 10 returning or potentially returning squadmates as well as alternative recruitments for each one in case they are dead would be resource-heavy. Cutting a massive chunk of content for players who might have lost 4-5 squadmembers is also not something that Bioware would do.

If squadmembers from ME2 comes back, I believe they will choose the most popular ones that they think can fullfill an actual role and not just stand in the background calibrating engines...Yes I took a shot at Garrus At least Tali is setting up a conflict for ME3.

Go a few pages back, I wrote a detailed explanation of how you could incorporate 6 ME2 squadmates, your Virmire Survivor, and 3 new characters (for a total of 10 characters again) with minimal resource use.

Also, there's a statistic that a lot of people are neglecting. It's understandable, because it's not a widely known stat, but Bioware released information sating that, on average, 15 percent of the squad dies on the suicide mission.

Assuming that the average player ended the game with 10 characters (I'm assuming that the people who got the DLC average out vs. the people who only gathered the required 8 characters), and assuming all squadmates had an equal chance of dying (I'm just doing this because it makes the math easier. I'm bad at math). If Bioware includes a given squad member in content for the new game, (if they make Miranda recruitable, for instance) only 1.5% of all players importing a saved game with miss that content. People who lost five or six characters are a very, very small minority.  Probably fewer than 5% of players lost more than five characters (and that estimate is extremely generous), and if 6 characters are choosen to recur... the percentage of players who lost all the characters chosen to recur should be almost infinitesimally low.

(This is especially true if Miranda is chosen to recur and Mordin is left off, as I proposed. Guides to the Suicide mission state that Mordin dies easily, so I'd assume that a disproportionate number of characters lost him. In contrast, Miranda can survive one of the key death situations even if she is not loyal, so I am assuming she has a higher survival number. However things are, Bioware has all the data and can make decisions based on surivial rates, if they want to.)

Let's just say this: the number of people who romanced Jacob in ME3 is probably roughly eqivalent to the number of people who lost six squadmates.

Nobody thinks all 10 or 12 will be back. Bioware has implied heavily that all 10 will not be back. I've also seen references to a quote from Bioware that implies that doing a LOT worse than average on the suicice mission may hurt you in ME3, but I don't have a citation for that. (if anyone else does, I'd appreciate it).

In my little write-up I tried to use a mix of character popularity estimates, story-relatedness, and ease of killing them on the mission to pick who to let go, dropping Zaeed, Kasumi, Samara, Jacob, Mordin, and Jack. Garrus and Miranda live because they are popular. I would prefer to have Mordin, myself, but there you go. I consider Thane on the "popularity and plot relevance bubble," I just put him in as a survivor for gender romance option parity, because Jacob is statistically less popular and has no more plot relevance than Thane.

It is always possible to incorporate it and I don't think the main focus of ME3 is about squadmates anyway so using old ones makes sense, but the average gamer has a very short attentionspan (myself included) and often wants "something new"; in turn having new squadmates also makes sense. We'll just have to wait until E3 and so on to see what happens, cause I think they'll start showing off then Either way as long as ME3 rocks and existing or new squadmates are made more interesting/as interesting, I won't complain.

[Lee337]

Akizora wrote...

Opinions may not be facts but creating variables for 10 returning or potentially returning squadmates as well as alternative recruitments for each one in case they are dead would be resource-heavy. Cutting a massive chunk of content for players who might have lost 4-5 squadmembers is also not something that Bioware would do.

If squadmembers from ME2 comes back, I believe they will choose the most popular ones that they think can fullfill an actual role and not just stand in the background calibrating engines...Yes I took a shot at Garrus At least Tali is setting up a conflict for ME3.

I agree, replacing dead squadmates would be a lot of work. If they did this, it would "cut" as much content for those whose characters lived as those who lost them all.

Bioware wouldn't be cutting content at all, it'd still be there and available. You just need to replay ME2 or possibly start a new game. You don't get everything on your first go, you have to replay. Replayability isn't a bad thing!

 I missed out in my first play of seeing Wrex again, because I hadn't invested in enough charm points and rushed to Virmire before Wrexs mission. I missed out Liaras love scenes in ME1 and LoTSB because I went with Ash. I missed out on Kiadan because I saved Ash. I missed out on much of Jacks conversations because she and Miranda had a fight, and it was too early in the game to get the paragon option so I sided with Miranda and Jack refused to talk to me.  There's loads more. It's not cut content it's just not available due to my choices.

If you failed so badly at the suicide mission and then never replayed it for a better ending, well I'm not sure someone who played one playthrough is really going to be that bothered about it and if they want the content without replaying, just use the new game button.

[Akizora]

Lee337 wrote...

Akizora wrote...

Opinions may not be facts but creating variables for 10 returning or potentially returning squadmates as well as alternative recruitments for each one in case they are dead would be resource-heavy. Cutting a massive chunk of content for players who might have lost 4-5 squadmembers is also not something that Bioware would do.

If squadmembers from ME2 comes back, I believe they will choose the most popular ones that they think can fullfill an actual role and not just stand in the background calibrating engines...Yes I took a shot at Garrus At least Tali is setting up a conflict for ME3.

I agree, replacing dead squadmates would be a lot of work. If they did this, it would "cut" as much content for those whose characters lived as those who lost them all.

Bioware wouldn't be cutting content at all, it'd still be there and available. You just need to replay ME2 or possibly start a new game. You don't get everything on your first go, you have to replay. Replayability isn't a bad thing!

 I missed out in my first play of seeing Wrex again, because I hadn't invested in enough charm points and rushed to Virmire before Wrexs mission. I missed out Liaras love scenes in ME1 and LoTSB because I went with Ash. I missed out on Kiadan because I saved Ash. I missed out on much of Jacks conversations because she and Miranda had a fight, and it was too early in the game to get the paragon option so I sided with Miranda and Jack refused to talk to me.  There's loads more. It's not cut content it's just not available due to my choices.

If you failed so badly at the suicide mission and then never replayed it for a better ending, well I'm not sure someone who played one playthrough is really going to be that bothered about it and if they want the content without replaying, just use the new game button.

I would love to have high replayability, however most gamers dont play through a game more than once and the same is true for Mass Effect. I won't complain if it has such high replayvalue that half the game will be different, but I don't really see it happening ^^

[Raphael diSanto]

 I was going to deconstruct the entire original post, but I realized, halfway through, that really all i was doing was writing the same stuff, over and over. Kinda like the OP did, really.

For example - Using the fact that a squad member can be not-loyal as a reason for them not returning is a lame argument, because the obvious counter argument is simply that for all the non-loyal squad members out there, there's probably more loyal versions of the same.

All the OP did was post a list of reasons that could be used by the writers to justify the exclusion of ME1/ME2 squadmates in ME3. Those reasons are absolutely valid. But he (she?) has absolutely no way of knowing if they're actually going to be used, unless s/he is privvy to closed-door discussions about ME3 with the writers themselves.

There's precious little evidence either way.

An example: 

Yes, it's a "fact" that Thane has a terminal illness. But not a single person here knows whether or not BioWare will decide to have him get treatment for it. Life-extension treatment? Who knows? Cerberus brought Shepard back from the dead... Would it be lame? Maybe. That's subjective, I think, and dependent upon your opinion of what makes a story "lame".

But the important point is.... Whether or not it's lame, it is still a route the BioWare writers -could- take, should they wish to re-include him in ME3.

For every reason the OP posted for them to be left out, there's an equal and opposite reason -to- include them.

Modifié par Raphael diSanto, 26 mars 2011 - 03:10 .

[Elite Midget]

I leave for the night and I have giant paragraphs awaiting me. Well, here goes.

-Bourne Endeavor -

It sounds plausiable when you ignore the other variables. Such as Cerberus Loyal Miranda going back to her post, via TIMs orders, or that she could potientially die or is unloyal. I for one can't stand the idea of outright denying Squaddies for any person in a games sequel just because they didn't have the perfect ME2 save. Which I'll add will stlil have variables to push others away even if said save was perfect.

Besides, Miranda is a bright girl and the main reason she joined Cerberus was a promise of protection for herself and her sister. If she betrays Cerberus at the end of ME2 than she needs to find another to protect her sister since TIM, the bitter type that holds grudges, she'll need to find another to do the job.


Miranda was very relevant to the ME2 plot as was Mordin. Though you're correct that the others were just meat sacks willing to take the bullet for Shepard. The reason for this is that Bioware threw out the plot in favor of character backstories and simply had too many Squaddies. If Bioware has learned anything from ME1 and ME2 is that Quality always trumps Quantity. Thus, if Bioware is smart, they wouldn't rationally bring the dead back since it would just bring back the same problems from before.


It would exist if the dead are brought back. They simply can't be intergrated well into ME3 due to the many Variables thatwould force them to leave. If they did get in the best you could hope for is Zaeed/Kasumi style for them and to me that would be sad. Why? Well, it would be a huge disservice to the characters to be placed in such a state due to Fan demands of their unrealistic return.


So what're you saying here? Cameo's? Since that's all VS and Wrex got and even than said Cameo's were extremely short. Which I might add was even short for Liara as well outside DLC and VS having a Loophole. So really, what are you implying here?


Despite what Samara has learned she cannot ignore her code for years end while doing nothing. It's simply not possible, especially since her oath only was supposed to last through the events of ME2. Clearly Bioware used that as an obvious excuse on why she wouldn't return even if she's loyal and alive by the end. Hell, there was even a conversation you can have after ME2 with Samara where she makes mention that she would still leave anyway. Though this is highlighted even more if you're a Renegade.


Pursueing Morinth isn't the only thing she was doing. It was simply her main path. Even after killing Morinth she makes mention that she must still follow her Code and after repaying her debt to Shepard she must continue doing her life mission. Also, Samara knew of Saren, the Matriarch, and the Geth threat in ME1 yet she didn't let it bother her all too much. Especially since no one in the Terminus System could hope to halt her she went after Saren anyway.


Not all Fans are correct, however. What some are demanding is that Bioware retcons their own story so that they tell the story that they, the fans, want. That's simply bad business since if you start trying to cater to what a few fans want over others and changeing your story to appease said minority fanbase you'll end up alienating everyone anyway. Thus it's a No-Win Situation and the best path is to follow the path they have predesigned.

To me, I would rather have them Wrex Effect'd than to end up with only Tali and Garrus as returning Squaddies yet again. In my eyes that's just catering to a loud minority and screwing over the rest of your fanbase. It simply doesn't make sense to try and appease the minority when all of the Squaddies share many variables that deny their return to Squaddie status. Basically, bad business and would only upset fans even more.

I mean, do you remember how pissed off VS, Wrex, and Liara fans were when Me2 hit? Times that by 10 and than add those ME1 fans together. That's how bad it would be if they were biased and brought back the individual popular killable squaddies while giving the bird to the rest of the Fanbase again.


Or they could go the doable route and introduce a whole new cast and than show Shepard how the old Squaddies are doing and how much more beneficial they are to defeating te Reapers outside of being Shepard's guns. Such as Garrus leading his own Squad that may be used to infiltrate later in ME3 or Tali aiding in the Quarian Civil War that was hinted at than placed on the Admirality board due to her actions that saved the fleet.

Again, you're trying to punish new players in what's supposed to be a standalone experience. Bioware has stated that importing wasen't needed and you wouldn't be punished gameplay wise. Let me tell you, an extra Squaddie effects Gameplay by a HUGE amount. Such as not having Tali or Legion when fighting a LOKI or not having Grunt or Samara to fight Collector's. Besides, what would be the point of denying such large swaths of content anyway? All it would do is just have new players, resentful of Bioware, to buy ME2 used at Gamestop or something thus Bioware profitted from nothing for trying to appease a minority while pissing off Casuals/Newcomers.

As for CulturalGeekGirl ...

I'll respond later. You typed a lot and I would like to read it first before responding. Unlike some others you're worth my time to debateing against since you explain yourself in an intelligent matter than just saying I'm wrong without any substance.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 26 mars 2011 - 05:40 .

[Raphael diSanto]

You keep using the word 'Variables'. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

[Almostfaceman]

Elite Midget wrote...

Unlike some others you're worth my time to debateing against since you explain yourself in an intelligent matter than just saying I'm wrong without any substance.

Ok Plankton, come back after you've tried to steal the secret formula again.

[Elite Midget]

I know exactly what it means and I for one believe that you don't understand what they mean. The only awnser I've seen you throw out is that Bioware should retcon things and simply pretend that some variables never existed. In my eyes that would be a cop out and is bad writing. If Bioware can't stick to what they extstablished than what was the point of giving us choices anyway if all other choices but the 'Perfect' one is ignored?

[Elite Midget]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Elite Midget wrote...

Unlike some others you're worth my time to debateing against since you explain yourself in an intelligent matter than just saying I'm wrong without any substance.

Ok Plankton, come back after you've tried to steal the secret formula again.

Still here and posting off topic? Really, now. If it bothers you so much to see facts than why are you even here? You know, other than your failed attempts to troll me.

[FobManX]

I could see some returning but as NPCs. For example, Legion could be the leader of the new Geth, Tali could hold a leadership position with the Quarians, etcc(assuming they're alive of course).

[Elite Midget]

Which would fit into the cameo, temp squaddie status ala Liara, or they expanding beyond just being Shepard's Guns dureing the Time skip.

True Fans should desire to see their characters evolve and not remain stagnet over a long period of time. Garrus can't remain in Shepard's Shadow forever and Tali cannot ignore when her people need her even if she's been exiled.

[Akizora]

FobManX wrote...

I could see some returning but as NPCs. For example, Legion could be the leader of the new Geth, Tali could hold a leadership position with the Quarians, etcc(assuming they're alive of course).

Geth do not have a leader, they are all Geth, Geth reach consensus - they do not lead or follow.

[Raphael diSanto]

Elite Midget wrote...

I know exactly what it means and I for one believe that you don't understand what they mean. The only awnser I've seen you throw out is that Bioware should retcon things and simply pretend that some variables never existed. In my eyes that would be a cop out and is bad writing. If Bioware can't stick to what they extstablished than what was the point of giving us choices anyway if all other choices but the 'Perfect' one is ignored?

I have NEVER said that BioWare should retcon anything. Please point out where I said that.

[Almostfaceman]

Elite Midget wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Elite Midget wrote...

Unlike some others you're worth my time to debateing against since you explain yourself in an intelligent matter than just saying I'm wrong without any substance.

Ok Plankton, come back after you've tried to steal the secret formula again.

Still here and posting off topic? Really, now. If it bothers you so much to see facts than why are you even here? You know, other than your failed attempts to troll me.

Stay on target Plankton!  You've got a wall of text to respond to from CulturalGeekGirl.

[Elite Midget]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

 I was going to deconstruct the entire original post, but I realized, halfway through, that really all i was doing was writing the same stuff, over and over. Kinda like the OP did, really.

For example - Using the fact that a squad member can be not-loyal as a reason for them not returning is a lame argument, because the obvious counter argument is simply that for all the non-loyal squad members out there, there's probably more loyal versions of the same.

All the OP did was post a list of reasons that could be used by the writers to justify the exclusion of ME1/ME2 squadmates in ME3. Those reasons are absolutely valid. But he (she?) has absolutely no way of knowing if they're actually going to be used, unless s/he is privvy to closed-door discussions about ME3 with the writers themselves.

There's precious little evidence either way.

An example: 

Yes, it's a "fact" that Thane has a terminal illness. But not a single person here knows whether or not BioWare will decide to have him get treatment for it. Life-extension treatment? Who knows? Cerberus brought Shepard back from the dead... Would it be lame? Maybe. That's subjective, I think, and dependent upon your opinion of what makes a story "lame".

But the important point is.... Whether or not it's lame, it is still a route the BioWare writers -could- take, should they wish to re-include him in ME3.

For every reason the OP posted for them to be left out, there's an equal and opposite reason -to- include them.

Here's your post. Sumed up as Retcon, forget variables, and basically do things my way even if it screws someone else over.

It's funny really... You have no facts to back it up but you say there 'might' be more loyal squaddies in saves than non-loyal. If that were the case than so many wouldn't have needed a common sense guide to the Suicide Mission. Furthermore, even if it's the majority you're willing to screw over what might be the minority since you're one of those that has everyone loyal. That shows your biased to only your opinion and don't care who you screw over just as long as you One and Only Perfect Choices make it in ala returning dead Squaddies that are more popular than other Squaddies.