51 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

I just read this and felt the need to comment on it personally:-

From www.pcgamer.com/2011/05/19/bioware-on-why-you-have-to-kill-300000-batarians-before-mass-effect-3-starts/

PC Gamer: Do you think that Mass Effect 2 was successful in convincing players that they needed to work for Cerberus? It seemed like quite a bold angle to have a terrorist organisation employing you, and you start out very resistant to the idea. Do you feel that that worked in the end?

Casey Hudson: It’s actually kind of interesting, because… most video games don’t offer any choice in the story – the story is the story. But as soon as you offer choice in a story, where you stop offering choice is where you’re criticised. And you end up being criticised for not having enough choice, even though you offer this much more. It’s at the edges where you’re criticised.So I would say that the idea of Shepard dying, and essentially being resurrected by a group that he may or may not agree with, is part of that story that we felt served that episode of the series. And I think that it worked on that angle. It happens on different scales too, like sometimes something has to happen. Without being specific, I was playing a game that has a interactive story to some degree, and I’m given something that’s extremely important, and I’m supposed to take it to a certain character. Then I’m talking to that character, and that character says “Oh you have it, thank you. I’ll just take that.” But it then gives you a dialogue response – you have one response and it’s “Yes.” And at that point I literally couldn’t touch my controller, because I thought “I don’t want to.” I would not say yes. But at least what we try to do is, if that thing has to happen in the story, then we at least let you do something or deal with it in some way. Even if it’s telling the person “No,” and then they say “Well, you’re not going to get very far if you don’t do this.” Some kind of flavour around how you can play it.

PC Gamer: Yeah, there are some in Mass Effect where your options are “Yes,” “Definitely yes,” or “Oh, alright, yes.”

Casey Hudson: Yeah, sometimes it has to be like that to tell a story that doesn’t become multiple different stories, versus different versions of a story.

The thing is, ME2 suffered the same problem when it came to Cerberus as the unnamed game Casey refers to, not so much because you had to work for them, but because of the way it was handled. It's a classic case of the little things making the difference. I don't think any reasonable person can expect the player to just not work for them given the story and all, as much as they may object, but the fact of the matter was there just simply wasn't enough options to verbally rebel or object, put Cerberus down or explain your actions to others without also seeming to support Cerberus. Yeah... there were admittedly some options, but usually it was just the odd dialogue choice to slag off the Illusive Man. Usually when I found it mattered and I was dealing with others, the choice simply wasn't there, and my Shepard never really got to explain themselves and just always seemed to be on the verge of saying, "I agree with and support Cerberus fully!" far too often.

Sorry, but despite saying --and I quote-- "But at least what we try to do is, if that thing has to happen in the story, then we at least let you do something or deal with it in some way. Even if it’s telling the person “No,” and then they say “Well, you’re not going to get very far if you don’t do this.” Somekind of flavour around how you can play it." that just didn't seem to happen when it really should have or enough. Yes, one doesn't expect to have the choice to walk away, but it just felt like there wasn't an option at all half the time, and you just went along with it. Even if the objection fell on deaf ears and led to the exact same outcome, it would still be nice to at least object; to see your Shepard slag off The Illusive Man and Cerberus to others and not just be TIM's subservient little lapdog, because that's what it felt like. It just made it all seem far too forced.

Two classic examples are when TIM intentionally betrays you with the "derelict" Collector ship, and while you can object to his actions for a while, it ends up with you just not being given a choice in how you inform your crew in the end: TIM just says, "don't tell them what I did" and instead of being able to object further it just cuts away and we see Jacob saying, "I guess The Illusive Man didn't betray us after all..." which illustrates that there was no player choice at all and despite his/her objections mere seconds ago Shepard ended up just going, "Derp! Okay, master!" to The Illusive Man and going off to tell his lies to the crew to make him not look like the manipulative monster he is, when what a non pro-Cerberus Shepard should be doing is trying to drive as big a wedge between his/her crew and Cerberus as possible and turning them away from that organisation and more towards his/her methods and way of thinking. That doesn't mean that it actually had to set a tag or change a variable, or anything really changes at all, but at least the option would be there to object and do that when it just simply wasn't, and the game just wrestled control from you. It was exactly one of those moments Casey described where you just didn't want to play anymore as an anti-Cerberus Paragon because the game just didn't let you make a choice you rightly should have.

The second example is in the mostly otherwise excellent LotSB DLC. When Tela Vasir starts condemning you for working with Cerberus, there is absolutely no option at all for Shepard to defend himself/herself and the actions taken while working with Cerberus without defending them. There's nothing whereby you can agree that Cerberus is evil and simply say, "it was necessary given the circumstances because only they are taking action and I need their resources" or anything like that; all you could basically say is, "Cerberus is right and I fully support them" in a nutshell. It was an otherwise great moment in a great DLC completely ruined by utter lack of choice. Again, it didn't have to really change anything at all beyond the dialogue choice, but it would have made all the difference.

I know that we're not working with Cerberus in ME3 again and all, but I still think that the devs should keep this in mind overall when working on ME3. I know after the issues people had with ME1's "three dialogue choices that actually literally have Shepard saying the same thing and don't change a thing at all" that you guys (the devs) wanted to cut down on redundant dialogue and basically eliminate multiple dialogue choices that really did just have the same result, but there's a difference between culling responses that are exactly the same in every way and just taking away choice entirely. Even if things don't change much, the ability to at least choose a different line that's delivered in a different way can make all the difference, even if the player is still railroaded and rerouted on the same track in the end. Some may call it an "illusion of choice" rather than real choice, but that illusion can still be better when the only alternative is no choice at all. And I feel that unfortunately when it came to the Cerberus stuff, there simply wasn't enough choice at all, even if it was just an illusion.

Modifié par Terror_K, 20 mai 2011 - 01:44 .

[javierabegazo]

Very nice post, I agree with much of what you said, and I look forward to see how varied the paths to the end can be in ME3

[Apollo Starflare]

I agree for the most part. However conversely to what you are saying I don't think they offered enough options for Shepard to toe the Cerberus line either, to have a Shep who ends up buying into what Cerberus offers after seeing that they aren't just a crazy group of evil scientists.

I found that the way the dialogues pertaining to Cerberus were written, with those exceptions you mention and maybe a couple more for my example above being taken into account, it was mostly a case of playing it safe in the middle. You could either be mildly antagonist towards them, or mildly in support of them. You aren't able to fully commit your Shepard to one side or the other, which as you say I feel could have happened without compromising the story arc of ME2.

So yeah, hoping they let us further flesh out how our Shepard feels about them in ME3, although it doesn't look like pro-Cerberus Shepards are going to get much of a chance to reinforce that idea. Every Shep will seemingly be given a huge reason to hate them from the word go, regardless of what is going on with them. A shame if you ask me.

[Waltzingbear]

The Illusive Man actually says "tell your crew I didn't risk their lives unnecessarily".
Betrayal in that case would have meant TIM delivering Shepard to the Collectors for whatever sinister purpose. Just because he manipulated Shep and wasn't frank about the mission doesn't mean he betrayed you, at least by my definition of the word. "Lied to us, used us, a necessary risk".
There's also an option right thereafter where Shepard can say "if he tries something like this again the Reapers would be the least of his problems".

I think you misinterpreted the situation. Apart from another reason on your list of why Cerberus is naughty, nothing has changed really; the mission remains the same as well as The Illusive Man's motives.

If I'm not understanding what you're saying correctly please tell- what was the choice you were not granted to make?

Regarding Vasir. Look at this. Sounds to me like a paraphrase of what you wanted to say minus the few extra bits.

I'm getting the vibe here that all of this is about the sour taste you get from not being able to say, or role-play, exactly what you wish, and what you ask for is more dimensions of role playing, which is technically impossible to achieve in a video game.

Modifié par Waltzingbear, 20 mai 2011 - 02:04 .

[Terror_K]

Waltzingbear wrote...

The Illusive man actually says "tell your crew I didn't risk their lives unnecessarily".
Betrayal in that case would have meant TIM delivering Shepard to the Collectors for whatever sinister purpose. Just because he manipulated Shep and wasn't frank about the mission doesn't mean he betrayed you, at least by my definition of the word. "Lied to us, used us, a necessary risk".
There's also an option right thereafter where Shepard can say "if he tries something like this again the Reapers would be the least of his problems".
I think you misinterpreted the situation. Apart from another reason on your list of why Cerberus is naughty, nothing has changed really; the mission remains the same as well as The Illusive Man's motives.

If I'm not understanding what you're saying correctly please tell- what was the choice you were not granted to make?

You didn't get the choice at all to tell your crew that TIM set you all up. You and your crew suspect as much after the incident and they begin to get suspicious, then you --alone-- confront TIM on the matter and he admits to it, but then tells you not to tell the crew. Rather than being allowed to make the choice to tell them what really happened and confirm their suspicions, it just fades away and fades back and we have Jacob clearly indicating that Shepard just did what TIM asked of him/her and kept it to him/herself that they were set-up. You don't get to choose what Shepard told his/her crew... you don't even get to see it; you only get the aftermath as a cutscene with no real control.

Again, I don't expect it to change the actual outcome of the game or put you on another path, but it would be nice if you simply got to have control of that situation and tell your crew the truth and thus have them react more negatively towards TIM, if only for one moment before things continue on as usual. Too often the player is simply railroaded into agreeing with TIM and being his little lapdog without any proper objections. As Apollo stated, it played the middle-ground too much.

Regarding Vasir.Look at this. Sounds to me like a paraphrase of what you wanted to say minus the few extra bits.

That's the neutral option with the "it doesn't matter" line tacked on. My Shepard would never, IMO, say, "it doesn't matter" when it came to what Cerberus did, especially considering she was the Akuze thresher maw victim. Where's the upper right Paragon dialogue choice there? Where is the choice that isn't so wishy washy and allows me to directly agree and slam Cerberus, but give a good excuse for my "joining them" and even say I haven't technically joined them but are just using their resources and info because they are my only real source and the only ones doing something (i.e. they are a last and only resort right now)? There's the neutral and Renegade option on that wheel, but nothing for the upper-right Paragon choice.

I'm getting the vibe here that all of this is about the sour taste you get from not being able to say, or role-play, exactly what you wish, and what you ask for is more dimension of role playing, which is technically impossible to achieve in a video game.

Not at all. Read the original post again. I don't expect to have it change that much overall about the game and set new tags and paths... I just expect a few more upper-right options that give me a line that more reflects my disdain for Cerberus. Fill the blank upper right gaps such as the one in that Tela Vasir example... allow me an extra dialogue choice for either "Tell crew" or "keep to self" after talking with TIM post-Collector vessel instead of just fading to black and then to Jacob revealing you just towing the Cerberus line. It doesn't take that much... just a few little bits of extra dialogue here and there that allow just a tad more freedom. There are already places where you get to slag off Cerberus (e.g. when Tali is first aboard you can basically tell her you're just doing it because you need to and don't trust them) but it never really seems to be where it really matters.

Modifié par Terror_K, 20 mai 2011 - 03:31 .

[DTKT]

 Not at all. Read the original post again. I don't expect to have it change that much overall about the game and set new tags and paths... I just expect a few more upper-right options that give me a line that more reflects my disdain for Cerberus. Fill the blank upper right gaps such as the one in that Tela Vasir example... allow me an extra dialogue choice for either "Tell crew" or "keep to self" after talking with TIM post-Collector vessel instead of just fading to black and then to Jacob revealing you just towing the Cerberus line. It doesn't take that much... just a few little bits of extra dialogue here and there that allow just a tad more freedom. There are already places where you get to slag off Cerberus (e.g. when Tali is first aboard you can basically tell her you're just doing it because you need to and don't trust them) but it never really seems to be where it really matters.

I'm with you on this. I don't mind working for Cerberus for the sake of the story. What I didn't like is that I couldn't make it obvious that I was doing it because I had to.  More tidbits of dialoge showing that your Shepard really didnt like them would have been nice.

[AngryFrozenWater]

This is a great post, Terror_K. I absolutely agree with you. The illusion of choice can be as important as real choices in the examples you provided. I wish BW reads this and implements it in ME3.

[SkittlesKat96]

Yeah I agree they should have let you have more extreme opinions and made the plot a little bit better in that regard, I liked it in ME 1 where you could basically tell Captain Anderson that you didn't care too much about being involved with the council and that you think they can't help

And in ME 2 I would have liked at more points in the game to have been able to have my Shepard talk more to the Illusive Man or Miranda about how much he despises Cerberus and their methods etc.

[CARL_DF90]

I sincerely hope Bioware is taking notes from this thread.

Modifié par CARL_DF90, 20 mai 2011 - 03:28 .

[LeVaughnX]

To be honest I found multiple times where I "wanted" to say something or do something that was a fair choice but it wasn't found.

For example - I'm a pure Paragon player and I don't want to be a flaming dick (and get random renegade points) just to prove my point and defend myself. The biggest issue I had was that you honestly did look like nothing but a Cerberus junkie. Now for some players who believe (in real life as well) that a "Cerberus Cult" is correct morally and WANTED to work for them; but damn it all I wanted to defend my Shepard and flat out tell everyone that I didn't care for Cerberus one friggen bit!

I mean hell even Anderson and the VS are all anal about you and Cerberus but you barely get a chance to really explain anything! Now I don't expect a massive game altering conversation but I expect a right in a game with this kind of quality to at the very least explain my side of the damn story. I respect Mass Effect and ME2 but seriously where the hell did all the choices go that did in a sense matter for your personal character AND the people you are with?

Bioware - if you want to make ME3 better you need to correct various problems with ME2..One being this problem of choice...We want more say in things...we don't like feeling like a damned two year old being guided around some amusement park!

[shep82]

Very good points in this thread and I bet they will listen to the compalints and suggestions. I do think there were a few times that choice could have been implemented better but in the long run I think they did a superb job with ME 2. Choice was an key part of ME2 and overall I feel they did a good job.

[dreman9999]

Terror_K wrote...

Waltzingbear wrote...

The Illusive man actually says "tell your crew I didn't risk their lives unnecessarily".
Betrayal in that case would have meant TIM delivering Shepard to the Collectors for whatever sinister purpose. Just because he manipulated Shep and wasn't frank about the mission doesn't mean he betrayed you, at least by my definition of the word. "Lied to us, used us, a necessary risk".
There's also an option right thereafter where Shepard can say "if he tries something like this again the Reapers would be the least of his problems".
I think you misinterpreted the situation. Apart from another reason on your list of why Cerberus is naughty, nothing has changed really; the mission remains the same as well as The Illusive Man's motives.

If I'm not understanding what you're saying correctly please tell- what was the choice you were not granted to make?

You didn't get the choice at all to tell your crew that TIM set you all up. You and your crew suspect as much after the incident and they begin to get suspicious, then you --alone-- confront TIM on the matter and he admits to it, but then tells you not to tell the crew. Rather than being allowed to make the choice to tell them what really happened and confirm their suspicions, it just fades away and fades back and we have Jacob clearly indicating that Shepard just did what TIM asked of him/her and kept it to him/herself that they were set-up. You don't get to choose what Shepard told his/her crew... you don't even get to see it; you only get the aftermath as a cutscene with no real control.

Again, I don't expect it to change the actual outcome of the game or put you on another path, but it would be nice if you simply got to have control of that situation and tell your crew the truth and thus have them react more negatively towards TIM, if only for one moment before things continue on as usual. Too often the player is simply railroaded into agreeing with TIM and being his little lapdog without any proper objections. As Apollo stated, it played the middle-ground too much.

Regarding Vasir.Look at this. Sounds to me like a paraphrase of what you wanted to say minus the few extra bits.

That's the neutral option with the "it doesn't matter" line tacked on. My Shepard would never, IMO, say, "it doesn't matter" when it came to what Cerberus did, especially considering she was the Akuze thresher maw victim. Where's the upper right Paragon dialogue choice there? Where is the choice that isn't so wishy washy and allows me to directly agree and slam Cerberus, but give a good excuse for my "joining them" and even say I haven't technically joined them but are just using their resources and info because they are my only real source and the only ones doing something (i.e. they are a last and only resort right now)? There's the neutral and Renegade option on that wheel, but nothing for the upper-right Paragon choice.

I'm getting the vibe here that all of this is about the sour taste you get from not being able to say, or role-play, exactly what you wish, and what you ask for is more dimension of role playing, which is technically impossible to achieve in a video game.

Not at all. Read the original post again. I don't expect to have it change that much overall about the game and set new tags and paths... I just expect a few more upper-right options that give me a line that more reflects my disdain for Cerberus. Fill the blank upper right gaps such as the one in that Tela Vasir example... allow me an extra dialogue choice for either "Tell crew" or "keep to self" after talking with TIM post-Collector vessel instead of just fading to black and then to Jacob revealing you just towing the Cerberus line. It doesn't take that much... just a few little bits of extra dialogue here and there that allow just a tad more freedom. There are already places where you get to slag off Cerberus (e.g. when Tali is first aboard you can basically tell her you're just doing it because you need to and don't trust them) but it never really seems to be where it really matters.

Is it a problem with the fact you did have a choice in how you said it or the fact you want ed to say something else that would end up being the samething?
In the end of the day it whould be that same thing, you'll just tell your crew that the set up was tactical to get the collecters by surprise. I so no narrowing of choices by not having a super speical way to tell the crew this. And your relationship with Cerburus ran the routes ether bad, nuetral and very well. I know for a fact that I took every moment to some how spit in TIM face as a Soleservivor and as much as I wanted to tell him off in the begining of the game, I got the chance to do so at the very end. I really would want better points on this because I'm not seeing this....Unless your taking about being stuck as an agent of Order.

[Infinite Legend_]

I agree, I didn't like how my renegade became a complete tool for TIM.

[dreman9999]

LeVaughnX wrote...

To be honest I found multiple times where I "wanted" to say something or do something that was a fair choice but it wasn't found.

For example - I'm a pure Paragon player and I don't want to be a flaming dick (and get random renegade points) just to prove my point and defend myself. The biggest issue I had was that you honestly did look like nothing but a Cerberus junkie. Now for some players who believe (in real life as well) that a "Cerberus Cult" is correct morally and WANTED to work for them; but damn it all I wanted to defend my Shepard and flat out tell everyone that I didn't care for Cerberus one friggen bit!

I mean hell even Anderson and the VS are all anal about you and Cerberus but you barely get a chance to really explain anything! Now I don't expect a massive game altering conversation but I expect a right in a game with this kind of quality to at the very least explain my side of the damn story. I respect Mass Effect and ME2 but seriously where the hell did all the choices go that did in a sense matter for your personal character AND the people you are with?

Bioware - if you want to make ME3 better you need to correct various problems with ME2..One being this problem of choice...We want more say in things...we don't like feeling like a damned two year old being guided around some amusement park!

.......But you do have the choice of telling people your not with cerburus and you don't like them.......Example:After getting Tali you get the choice of saying your in charge of the ship and is not working for cerburus....She then sarcaticly state" So your the one that commisioned all the listening devices on the ship..." The thing is you can say your not working for Cerburus and hate them as much as you like in ME2.....It just that people you talk to have the choice to beleive you or not. Anderson beleives you but still sees you location as untrustworthy and ask so, the VS does not, illistaing that people are different. Complaining that the character don't act the way you want them has nothing to do with choice.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

I kind of agree with you for the most part. I wish there were different dialog sometimes and different options. But I tend to get over it as, well, "illusion of choice". Also the dialog and choices can't simply address to everyone's expectations all the time because of that. Remember, you're not really roleplaying like in pen and paper RPG, but chosing specific already written dialog choices.

And I think there were some moments where you could explain this situation. For example: when Tali asks you why you're working with Cerberus, kind like Vasir. Almost same situation but there was the Paragon choice and kind of like what you wanted to say like Shep has no choice and is taking their funds.

But I don't forgive them for letting Vasir mention the Sole Survivor past and not a word from Shepard himself in the whole game.

[Thompson family]

Re: OP

And what, exactly, is Shep supposed to say when s/he resurfaces two years after his/her disappearance, flying around in an extremely expensive, state-of-the-art Cerberus spaceship with Cerberus making the crew's payroll?

"Man, I really hate this." or something to that effect?

Only if s/he wants to look like a hypocrite.

My Shep handled the problem thus:

Cmdr. Frank Shepard immediately left the system he started in and flew straight to the Citadel, where he docked the Normandy. The council could have seized the ship right then and there.

He then took Wilson and Lawson with him to Anderson's office to meet with the Council. They could have arrested him and two of Cerberus' top operatives -- and the recently recruited Kasumi Goto aboard the Normandy, assuming they could catch her. They did not. Not only did they let him come and go, they reinstated him as a Spectre and sanctioned the same mission Cerberus sent him out to do -- stop the collector attacks.

Even if you argue that the Normady and EDI could have gotten away somehow, a paragon Shepard would have stayed in the office and submitted to Council authority if that is what the Council wanted. Notably, that is NOT what the Council wanted. Note that the idea of sending out Shepard to the Terminus system to deal with the attacks was put forward by the Turian member, the one who presumably would like to nail Shep's hide to the side of a barn more than either of the others.

It's absolutely clear the Council had its mind made up about what to do with Shepard before s/he ever showed up.

So my Shep went to the bar in the Citadel, bought some ice brandy, picked up some high-quality provisions on the way back and had a binge with Chakwas. They toasted dead comrades. Then Shep went to Omega and went to work.

The lack of a bellyaching option didn't bother me at all.

One other thing:

It was Liara T'soni, not Shep, who made the deal with the devil here. Shep was a corpse when he found out s/he'd been delivered to Cerberus like a processed piece of beef. She's the one Shep should blame for his/her situation, and Shep most certainly does have the chance to do that in her office at Illium.

I despise TIM. Nobody playing this game blew up the Collector base with a bigger sense of gratification than me in every playthrough. However, within the game there are much bigger things at stake than Shep's discomfiture at working for a smooth villain. There's a job to be done and people to save. That's that.

[100k]

Waltzingbear wrote...
Regarding Vasir. Look at this. Sounds to me like a paraphrase of what you wanted to say minus the few extra bits

To be fair, this line (which I use most often) is still far too vague to convey what Shepard probably meant.

This is how it should have gone: 

Vasir: ...you pay them lip service while working for terrorists? Do you know what your friends at Cerberus are up to?

Shepard: Cerberus hasn't asked me to blow up a building of innocent people, Vasir! And if they did, not only would I quit, but I'd do everything in my power to stop them!

[Nimrodell]

Ah, the worst case of not having choice for me was Horizon and VS encounter. I handled Cerberus and TIM just fine 'cause I wasn't farming paragon or renegade points, either version would say to him what I wanted to (meaning - if he does that again, the reapers will be the least of his problems). But Horizon made me feel truly impotent and stupid. Either you were just friends with VS or LI, it was damn horrible... left bitter taste and was like cherry on the top of Shepard's impotence to actually break from that railroading cage.
The Arrival lack of choice was entirely valid for me and I actually liked the idea of having first truly canon event - no matter what moral stands you have, it happened and that was good example of railroading into next part of the story for me, but Horizon, just ugh, never ever again.

[ElitePinecone]

I agree with the OP, the lack of dialogue options hindered my sense of immersion at some points.

Like others have said, this contributed a lot to my dissatisfaction with Horizon, especially the complete inability for Shepard to wholeheartedly reject Cerberus (and say it was all about pragmatism and necessity) and the resulting flip-out by the VS. It felt needlessly dramatic and exaggerated, when the whole situation could've been handled with a calm conversation.

That being said, Arrival did go some way to alleviating this, at last acknowledging through Hackett's dialogue that Shepard had broken her/his connection to Cerberus.

[M-Sinistrari]

Thompson family wrote...

One other thing:

It was Liara T'soni, not Shep, who made the deal with the devil here. Shep was a corpse when he found out s/he'd been delivered to Cerberus like a processed piece of beef. She's the one Shep should blame for his/her situation, and Shep most certainly does have the chance to do that in her office at Illium.

When Liara admits to having given Shep's body to Cerberus and says she wasn't forthcoming with the info because she was afraid Shep would blame her, there's an option on the dialog wheel that says 'I'm sorry too' which does allow Shep to kinda yell at her about it.  Overall it's not as good as it could've been, but it's a something at least.

[alperez]

Very well put OP, part of the reason i and many others disliked the whole cerberus angle in me2 was for the very reasons you've spelled out.

It was badly handled and played out in order to force you into the position they wanted you to be in which is fine in most games but not in a game that is defined by choice. As bad as the 2 situations you mention for me and a lot of others Horizon illustrates this even more, whether you agree/disagree with what the VS is saying the responses shepard can make are just stupid and make no sense.

The annoying thing is that it wouldn't have taken that much extra work for it all to come across that much better, simply put Shepard should have had more options to express how it felt to work for cerberus postive or negative based on your intepretataton of it. Yes they had to tell a story and certain things had to be written in stone for the narrative to work but they could so easily have done both.

The thing which worries me most about it though is that in the end it was lazy writing, rather than put more thought and effort into the situation they went the easy route and instead of an uneasy alliance or a meeting of minds (for the cerberus fans) we got a mish mash that pleased neither and upset most.

With what we know may be the setup and storyline of me3 we may be faced with even more of these situations, Geth/Quarians and Krogans/Salarians etc. and if they put the same thought and effort into resolution of these issues as they did with working with cerberus then we could all be dissappointed.

[CARL_DF90]

Hope Bioware is taking notes and learning from these and other missteps.

[MrFob]

I agree in large parts with terror on most of the points.
I think that especially if the devs have to force you ino a certain direction, they should conceal that by giving the player the dialogue options to object to what's happening in the most drastic manner. Being able to vent some frustration that way makes swallowing the bitter pill much more immersive for the player because at least he sees a realistic reaction of the character he wants to play. Since we didn't get this option in ME2, problems and criticism occurred (remedied a little in LotSB where at least Shep can show that s/he is frustrated by the situation).
That said, I hope in ME3, being the last installment of the trilogy, we will actual get "real" freedom of choice and will not be forced down one track in the manner that happened in ME2. I mean, of course there will be unavoidable story events that must happen and Shep must react to, all I am asking is that we really get the chance to react in different manners and branch out the story quite a bit more diversely than in the last two installments of the series.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

CARL_DF90 wrote...

Hope Bioware is taking notes and learning from these and other missteps.

You said that 4 days ago, I don't think saying it again is going to make Bioware suddenly go "Oh look he really wants us to read this and take note..."

Apollo Starflare wrote...

I agree for the most part. However conversely to what you are saying I don't think they offered enough options for Shepard to toe the Cerberus line either, to have a Shep who ends up buying into what Cerberus offers after seeing that they aren't just a crazy group of evil scientists.

I found that the way the dialogues pertaining to Cerberus were written, with those exceptions you mention and maybe a couple more for my example above being taken into account, it was mostly a case of playing it safe in the middle. You could either be mildly antagonist towards them, or mildly in support of them. You aren't able to fully commit your Shepard to one side or the other, which as you say I feel could have happened without compromising the story arc of ME2.

So yeah, hoping they let us further flesh out how our Shepard feels about them in ME3, although it doesn't look like pro-Cerberus Shepards are going to get much of a chance to reinforce that idea. Every Shep will seemingly be given a huge reason to hate them from the word go, regardless of what is going on with them. A shame if you ask me.

Indeed... obvious example
Human dominance or just Cerberus

Why the frell would a Cerberus loyalist Shepard say that? I'm talking of the one who said...

I wish they had sooner.. in response to Miranda saying she is glad Cerberus recruited Shepard.

The obvious answer and it is a sad case indeed is most likely cost. Because basically what WE the players are wanting is OUR choice... now for that to appease everyone would mean the radial menu would probably take up a lot bigger area of the screen with far more than just the potential 6 choices available.

It would also mean more writing for the various choices and of course with that more VA work for Meers and Hale and thus we come into the age old conundrum of costs.

It is a shame indeed that we'll not get to truly have our Shepards saying what we really want them to say and sadly we will have to make do with whatever they can deliver.

Modifié par Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien, 24 mai 2011 - 03:31 .