167 réponses à ce sujet

[Pani Mauser]

alperez wrote...

They kept Liara and the Vs, alive so that no matter how you played the game these characters would be free to return in me3 and continue a story arc, something they were unable/reluctant to do with the me2 characters. So after doing that it makes absolutely no sense for them then to trim out these characters or allow others to choose not to have them in the squad. Its a storytelling device that they obviously felt they neeeded so they safeguarded it from the results of the suicide mission.

I’m well aware of this fact. And you can’t imagine how I despise such approach. It’s not like they started writing plot for ME3 after ME2. If they didn’t want the squad of 15+ characters in ME3 in the first place, why make such extensive crew in ME2? And even if they wanted big squad to make ME2 longer, they could kill those who don’t fit in their story during Suicide Mission. They had years to decide who is important and who is not and then kill everyone who is not important in ME2.

It would be only fair to the players. No false hope to have all those characters back and stuff. After making 2/3 of ME3 about the squad, relegating those characters to cameos is just insulting. Ok, you spent all that time recruiting the characters, getting to know them better, helping them to deal with their problems and keeping him alive? Congratulations, most of them don’t matter at all, you’ve been trolled, lol. It is indeed punishing players for caring.

alperez wrote...
The funny part of it is that you could argue that Tali and legion are story sensitive characters and are not protected at all which suggests that they aren't really that important overall to the plotline we'll be facing or that bioware are going to kick anyone who didn't do what they wanted us to do with those 2 characters in the ass in me3.

Actually, Tali is not needed for future subplot. Shepard made all necessary decision (give/hide evidence, persuade for war/peace) at her loyalty mission, and if Tali died, you will deal with Admiralty board on your own, that’s all. After all, Tali is not big politician or something. She is just known hero, like Shepard. And just like Shepard, she has zero influence on her government.

The same is with Legion. You made the decision on his loyalty mission, and as he is connected to other geth, they know what happened, and they know your role in it. And if you sold Legion to Cerberus, this would be the indicator that you don’t care for geth at all or you just see them as evil, so you should not be concerned with their fate in ME3, and if they side with the Reapers, it is clearly your call. So, Legion himself is not important too, it were decisions about him that mattered.

[Pani Mauser]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Babe Mause wrote...

It was stated in numerous interviews that some characters will return only as cameos. That is reason enough.

I've read and watched all the interviews other than a couple of the magazine ones, and I haven't heard them specify that some squadmates will be just brief cameos. I've heard them say "not permanent squadmates" but I think there's a major difference between "major NPC" "Temporary Squadmate" and "cameo."

For instance, a lot of people have postulated that Mordin will be on your ship as a tech officer and someone you can talk to, like Joker or Chakwas, but not actually playable on missions. This would be a lot bigger than a cameo, unless you consider Joker a "cameo" character.

My theory is that all or nearly all surviving squadmates (with the likely exception of Kasumi and Zaeed, /sigh) will either be major NPCs (somewhere between Joker and Chakwas in relative importance) or temporary squadmates for one mission (Like Liara in LotSB, but possibly with slightly shorter missions.) Some will be permanent squadmates.

I've based this theory on the same interviews and articles as you have, presumably. I'm just not interpreting the worst possible scenario, given the evidence we have access to. And yes I will be very sad if Kasumi is reduced to just a cameo, but as a DLC character I'm at peace with that. Other than the DLC peeps, though, I think everyone else has a pretty high chance of being significant in one of the ways I outlined above.

GameInformer, page 59, paragraphs 2 and 3 of "Getting the team backtogether" section.

If everyone from the previous games returned as a permanent party member, introducing new characters would be difficult...and the character selection screen would be a mess. The trick is giving gamers a satisfying payoff to the relationship they've built while managing the roles that each characters can play, from cameo to major player.

"It'sthe whole range and it's different per character", Hudson says. "Some characters are going to be absolutely core to the story. They're squad members. The whole structure of the story kind of pivots around them. Others will beconventional squad members that you can choose to have with you or not… Some characters might be there for just a mission. And some characters might just have cameo appearances."

Also, you could never properly interact with Joker and Chakwas aside of couple dialogs. Most of the time you just listened to them without being able to respond. They both had significantly less dialogs than squad members. And after seeing how Wrex got as much dialog as Conrad Verner, I don’t have my hopes up about cameos or NPCs. 

So, what is the point of having your favourite character on board, if all you get is just one dialog at the beginning and maybe some short remarks here and there after? And characters you don't care about will have tons of dialogs you'll never bother to hear. 

And in the worst case scenario, BW decides to implement much desired by players party-banter in the new game, and instead of interactions of characters I wished to see I will have to listen to the characters I never cared about 
(and I personally was never that interested in Liara or VS to hear their conversation with the rest of the crew). It's like someone gives you the most awesome shoes ever but two sizes smaller than needed. The awesomeness makes it even worse, because if they were not awesome, you wouldn't want to wear them. It's definitely not the end of the world, but frustrating as hell.

Modifié par Babe Mause, 03 mai 2011 - 05:37 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

I guess my question is this: which squaddies are you going to be really upset if they leave out? 

Based on those quotes, it sounds like they're hedging their bets. Like they might not have time to do as much as they want with everyone... I'd assume that those references to cameos apply mostly to Kasumi and Zaeed, and maybe one or two of the less popular characters. Since we have Liara, I might postulate that there's a decent chance that Samara will not be featured as heavily, or that they'll split time.

You seem to be implying that MOST characters will be cameod, whereas I don't get the impression that more than 2-4 will be cameos, and two of those will likely be Zaeed and Kasumi.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 03 mai 2011 - 05:49 .

[Raiil]

Well, even cameo can be relative. A lot of people viewed Wrex as a cameo (for those of us who had him) but I saw him as a power player in the scheme of things. Yes, we couldn't talk to him too much, but he was an anchor to our past and someone who gave us a decent amount of information.


What I'm hoping for is that for squaddies who can't/aren't currently slated to return permanently:

I'd like some to be like Wrex in the scheme of things: If Tali is alive, I'd trust her to be working on the geth solution- maybe mobilising those willing to work with their creators or trying to find a way to destabilise those working with the Reapers. Mordin might be working on,,, medical/genetic things. Maybe Jacob is now leading a group of 'good' mercs willing to help us out from time to time, providing intel and firepower for certain battles. That sort of thing.


Weave them into the tapestry, if you will. As a Thane girl, I'd like for him to either have a beautiful death or put into a position of information and support if he's not going to be a regular squaddie. Maybe he's gone to generic planet for treatment and he learns something that might help us. Or Zaeed, bless his grumpy little heart, is going in for old time's sake and giving you backup while you try to take out a Blue Suns lair that might have information involving the few collectors not destroyed at the end of the game.


There's plenty of ways to make old squaddies matter without having them on your six 24/7.

[CroGamer002]

My take on this.

[Pani Mauser]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I guess my question is this: which squaddies are you going to be really upset if they leave out? 

Based on those quotes, it sounds like they're hedging their bets. Like they might not have time to do as much as they want with everyone... I'd assume that those references to cameos apply mostly to Kasumi and Zaeed, and maybe one or two of the less popular characters. Since we have Liara, I might postulate that there's a decent chance that Samara will not be featured as heavily, or that they'll split time.

You seem to be implying that MOST characters will be cameod, whereas I don't get the impression that more than 2-4 will be cameos, and two of those will likely be Zaeed and Kasumi.

Mordin, Jack, Thane, Miranda, Grunt and Legion. 

I would include Zaeed and Kasumi in the list too, but as you said, the DLC characters most likely end up cameos, so I don't even hope for them. Though they could introduce them in ME3 like they did with Garrus in ME2. If you never recruited Garrus in the first game, you just got different dialog in the beginning. So, the same could be done for DLCs.

And I think that all LIs should be treated equally in terms of interaction. Otherwise it is just plain unfair.

So, basically, it is everyone. For me the best thing about Mass Effect is its characters. There are better RPGs, there are better TPS, but no game is even close to ME in terms of character  interaction. So, I'd rather have them concentrate on this aspect of the game instead of weapons, better battle AI, new sorts of enemies and all other stuff like this. Unfortunately, BW thinks otherwise.

[Pani Mauser]

Valentia X wrote...

There's plenty of ways to make old squaddies matter without having them on your six 24/7.

I don't argue that cameos matter, I just say that cameos never get the same amount of dialog as squadmates, and that's the only reason why I don't want characters I like to be cameos.

For example, what fun is in listening to Kaidan while you get to see Thane only for one dialog in the beginning and for one scene in the end? Especially when you know that he was left out because the squad is limited, and one place had to be given to Kaidan due to his plot armour. I don't know about you, but it would make me hate Kaidan no matter how awesome and useful he might be, and the game might end up being a rather frustrating experience.

I'm more inclined to accept some cheesy ending like EDI hacking all Reapers or Shepard talking them into leaving, rather than see characters to be left out.

[HTTP 404]

how is this a surprise OP? I wish I could tell some people a year ago, I told you so. haha

[SalsaDMA]

PMC65 wrote...

Just in case Bioware does read these and the game is not set in stone yet ....
Comment underlined above (with ME1 added) is what I am hoping for ... I have 8 slots and it is my choice. It would suck to have a crewmember that I don't like (Anderson as an example) forced on my Shepard because Timmy down the street may have killed the bulk of the squad. I am not Timmy and Bioware should meet the challenge that they themselves created. Fill this game up with content for all players since this is the last go-round. If you are worried that some content may not be seen because XYZ died, don't worry some will see it. I know that I have 4 Shepards with different choices & results - so amaze me!  

the whole game series is about making choices and choosing stuff. For example, in ME2, it wasn't untill my 3rd playthrough I actually tried tog et drunk at the Omega bar, and thereby discovered the little side event it caused.

Going by the argumentation of the 'nay sayers', that whole event was basicly wasted untill I actually took my 3rd playthrough. How many people never saw it? Why even put THE CHOICE in there if not every takes the choice to see it?

Please DO NOTE the irony in the above statement, as I feel the whole 'waste of resources' argument is logic loophole in a game series that is supposedly specifically about making choices. Choices, by their very nature, means opting one thing over the other. Therefore, regardless of what you do in a single playthrough, there should always be 'wasted stuff' you don't get to see, simply because of the nature of the game.

Only way to make sure everyone sees everything, is to make it 'goddamn movie'. We're playing a game with choices in them.

MAKE THOSE CHOICES HAVE MEANING BIOWARE

[SalsaDMA]

alperez wrote...

Secondly you have to remember the game has to work for new players as well as for those of us that are finishing the trilogy (getting a whole preknown squad with no intro right from the get go would drive new players nuts).

I truly fail to see people being 'driven nuts' by getting a squad of characters. Sheapard got a command station with briefing files about each character on his squad (He certainly should a CO of a strike squad). If you aren't aware, as a player, of the interconnections of the team, abilities of team members, personalities and such, you read it in the briefing file.

You don't want to read the briefing file? You don't care enough about the characters anyway to be bothered about their presence.

[SalsaDMA]

crimzontearz wrote...

you are naive

Wrex came back in ME2 right? for all we know all the "killables" could come back as Wrex 

translation

inconsequentially

Or even worse: As VS v2

[Paragon Gabriel]

I asume the OP knows everything already about ME3.

Oh, and cameo could mean a lot. Do you consider Joker a cameo? He has a pretty nice role in ME.

[SalsaDMA]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I guess my question is this: which squaddies are you going to be really upset if they leave out? 

Any of them, including Zaeed and Kasumi.

Leaving any of them out means they care less about their game than about making a quick buck while scraping at the feet of EA.

[B3NGU1N]

I didnt particually like either VS, certainly not more than any of the mass effect 2 squaddies. However, I do think that some of the ME2 cast will return, mainly those with a reaon to or are hard to kill.

Garrus has already been confirmed, and he is quite hard to kill, plus he's one of the squaddies you have to get. If he's loyal, the only real place he can die is if your stupid and put him in the vents. Grunt too is hard to kill if loyal, hell even if he isnt loyal hes hard to kill. The only place he can really die is agian if you are a bit silly and tell him to lead a squad. Granted he's the best fighter, but you have leaders to pick from too.

Miranda is also hard to kill, as i believe she can only die if Shep dies, I might be wrong on that though.

Modifié par B3NGU1N, 03 mai 2011 - 07:45 .

[ExtremeOne]

I am not buying it Bioware . They should have planned ahead but oh no they want to protect the VS and Liara . Just admit Bioware that Mass Effect 2 is a side story because its clear it means nothing in ME 3

[Someone With Mass]

ExtremeOne wrote...

I am not buying it Bioware . They should have planned ahead but oh no they want to protect the VS and Liara . Just admit Bioware that Mass Effect 2 is a side story because its clear it means nothing in ME 3

Okay, seriously. 

Shut the **** up about things you have no clue about.

[lolwut666]

ExtremeOne = best troll evar

[Manic Sheep]

ExtremeOne wrote...
I am not buying it Bioware . They should have planned ahead but oh no they want to protect the VS and Liara . Just admit Bioware that Mass Effect 2 is a side story because its clear it means nothing in ME 3

We still do not know who is coming back and who isn't. The VS and Liara being protected dose not mean they are the only ones coming back. Liara is the SB and the VS is with the alliance. They probably have to survive for the main plot to work.  We don't have a heck of allot of info about the plot or characters and you can't judge there relevance of the 2nd in a trilogy until you have seen the 3rd.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 03 mai 2011 - 08:14 .

[alperez]

SalsaDMA wrote...



I truly fail to see people being 'driven nuts' by getting a squad of characters. Sheapard got a command station with briefing files about each character on his squad (He certainly should a CO of a strike squad). If you aren't aware, as a player, of the interconnections of the team, abilities of team members, personalities and such, you read it in the briefing file.

You don't want to read the briefing file? You don't care enough about the characters anyway to be bothered about their presence.

I was talking about new players coming into the game at me3 and finding that there was this whole squad of people already assembled that they didn't know and would have to work with, this might work in other game genre's but in an rpg would be completely alien to every new player that bioware hope will buy the game.

No rpg ever really gives you a pre-assembled squad, you start with one or 2 teamates and along the way you meet other characters who join with your quest, to have a full squad already present goes against all conventional rpg rules.

If that was something bioware ever considered doing in mass effect then they would have set the precedent right from the get go, but they didn't they went the traditional route so why in the 3'rd part of a trilogy would they suddenly decide to add this factor.

Not to menton from a simple story standpoint (what we know of it anyway) it makes no sense whatsoever to have a crew ready to go from the start, shepard is on trial, the normandy is in alliance hands, what are the crew to do wait outside the court and hope shepard not only gets the right verdict but is then given back control of a ship.

[SalsaDMA]

alperez wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...



I truly fail to see people being 'driven nuts' by getting a squad of characters. Sheapard got a command station with briefing files about each character on his squad (He certainly should a CO of a strike squad). If you aren't aware, as a player, of the interconnections of the team, abilities of team members, personalities and such, you read it in the briefing file.

You don't want to read the briefing file? You don't care enough about the characters anyway to be bothered about their presence.

I was talking about new players coming into the game at me3 and finding that there was this whole squad of people already assembled that they didn't know and would have to work with, this might work in other game genre's but in an rpg would be completely alien to every new player that bioware hope will buy the game.

No rpg ever really gives you a pre-assembled squad, you start with one or 2 teamates and along the way you meet other characters who join with your quest, to have a full squad already present goes against all conventional rpg rules.

If that was something bioware ever considered doing in mass effect then they would have set the precedent right from the get go, but they didn't they went the traditional route so why in the 3'rd part of a trilogy would they suddenly decide to add this factor.

Not to menton from a simple story standpoint (what we know of it anyway) it makes no sense whatsoever to have a crew ready to go from the start, shepard is on trial, the normandy is in alliance hands, what are the crew to do wait outside the court and hope shepard not only gets the right verdict but is then given back control of a ship.

So your argument is: Other games are not part of a trilogy and don't do it, so therefore ME3 shouldn't do it either, despite being part of a trilogy and a supposedly tight story connecting through all 3 games...

Can I just say I disagree and let you figure out why yourself? It should be obvious enough as to why, for anyone.

[Legbiter]

I actually don't want Wrex to be a squaddie. What he's doing is too important for the krogan.

[alperez]

Babe Mause

Firstly you answer part of your own question in your response, they did have years to prepare and plot the story and they did make sure certain characters that they feel are plot essential would be around, hence the return of the Vs and Liara. Your argument is that they did not do this with the me2 crew and that is what annoys you. Well welcome to the world of the fans of the Vs and Liara who argued the same point with me2.

As for killing off these characters during the suicide mission well that eliminates the choice you or i as the player have, would you have been happier with 4 or 5 storyline deaths in me2 where no matter what you did certain characters were doomed. Most people would have been appalled at such a thing, that you the player really didn't make any impact, that characters died, despite being loyal and despite you doing everything right, you still couldn't save character a. because of a plot death that someone else decided.

There had to be variables to make everything you did make sense otherwise there really would be no point to playing me2 at all, how those variables play into me3 is what we will soon find out.

As for tali or legion not being plot relevant because we've already done everything regarding those choices well i beg to differ. We don;t know the details of what we are to do in me3, but not having tali or legion could very well be the difference for all you or i know. Maybe if we gave legion to cerberus we're already screwed when we try to get the geth on side, maybe if legion dies in the suicide mission it screws us with the geth and we can't get them on board without him.

If tali is exiled or if she's dead maybe the quarians aint going to listen to the commander who lost her or got her exiled. Or maybe it'll be a one on one thinge where by not having either it means that we can only get one of the 2 factions on board. We just don't know at this stage, what we do know is that in the overall story context these 2 characters and the factions they represent may very well play a big part. Unlike perhaps Samara or Zaeed or some other characters.

All i'm saying is that we know so little at this stage and yet people are getting wound up over something that makes perfect sense. Not all characters who survived the suicide mission will play a full squadmate role in me3, really did you not see that one coming.

Regardless of storyline reasons, regardless of how you or i feel about certain characters, some of them are just not liked that much, some of them have roles that can be easily replaced by new or returning characters and some have genuine storyline reasons why they may not be in your squad. Would it not make sense for someone like Grunt seeing what the reapers are doing to Tuchanka stay and help the krogans? Or for Mordin seeing his home planet under attack try to help the salarians.

We don't know how the story plays out or who in fact will or will not be a full squadmate, if we find that all the me2 is cameod and play no real role in me3 then we would have a reason to be annoyed and upset. However we can be pretty sure this isn't the case as the articles have already told us, so why can't we trust that bioware may actually know what they're doing and that the reasoning we'll be given in me3 will make perfect sense both storyline wise and logistically.

[WizenSlinky0]

SalsaDMA wrote...

So your argument is: Other games are not part of a trilogy and don't do it, so therefore ME3 shouldn't do it either, despite being part of a trilogy and a supposedly tight story connecting through all 3 games...

Can I just say I disagree and let you figure out why yourself? It should be obvious enough as to why, for anyone.

See, here's the thing. New players are inevitably going to be the life blood of any franchise. It's honestly a lot harder to turn a player already in love with your IP off, than it is to attract a new player. When ME2 came out, do you think every player who got ME1 bought it? No, they didn't. As much as some of us may want to think the ME franchise is impossible to hate...so people actually do dislike the games.

Now, if you put out new games that completely ignore being able to be picked up by new players, you'll lose money. Simple as that. The run off of players who don't like what you've done with the IP will exceed the number of new players since they find it too difficult to pick up without playing the others. Now consider the fact the budget for ME3 was likely increased over that of ME2, just like ME2's budget was likely increased, based on sellability.

As a business, they would be shooting themselves in the foot to not put forth their story in a way that can be picked up by both veterans and newcomers alike.

[SalsaDMA]

alperez wrote...

 so why can't we trust that bioware may actually know what they're doing

Because Bioware also released DA2

[SalsaDMA]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

As a business, they would be shooting themselves in the foot to not put forth their story in a way that can be picked up by both veterans and newcomers alike.

Yes, I'm sure 'Return of the Jedi' or 'Return of the King' were severely hamstringed by following their established trilogy setting, rather than inventing a new one for the latest movie...

Note, sarcasm may be evident in the above sentence...