11 réponses à ce sujet

[AlexB1001]

I am a true Mass Effect fan. Having followed every scrap of information relating to Mass Effect 3, and having watched all the game footage (including the recent E3 videos) something has started to scare me a lot.

Let me get this straight. I'm not one of those people who scream "Mass Effect 3 is becoming a third person action game" - I thought the E3 gameplay looked beautiful and much more fluid than the awkward clunkiness that was combat in ME1. My big fear is concerning something else entirely: squadmates.

For me, squadmates (or companions, or whatever you want to call them) are the centrepiece of any good RPG. And squadmates are something that ME1 and ME2 handled brilliantly. Some of the greatest moments for me in ME2 were building up relationships with a whole cast of unique characters, and then bringing them into battle time and time again, knowing that if I had brought another I would have got different dialogue and a different gameplay experience. The consistency is what made it the best - in both games, you feel as if you're getting to know these characters very well, and it is what makes achievements/trophies like 'No One Left Behind' at the end of the ME2 campaign so gratifying. I had grown attached to these characters, and it was amazing knowing I brought each of them to hell and back: my Shepherd was a good enough commander that he ensured all his (or her in my case) squadmates survived the Collector's Base unscathed.

Now I have this terrible dread that in ME3, Shepherd will be the focus (see the cover art compared to those of the other games), and squadmates will not get the proper treatment that they deserve. Why do I say this? Here's my evidence:

To start with, the game's producers have stated that they want a smaller cast of permanent squadmates in the final game. I don't have a huge problem with this (although I loved the huge range of characters ME2 offered), and if nothing else it gives Bioware a chance to flesh out a smaller amount of characters even more. But the problem in this is that I have squadmates from the last two games that I am desperate to return, but with less squadmates this will definetely be impossible. Maybe you are happy that Liara and Tali are returning, but I'd much rather have Samara and Legion by my side throughout the whole game.

This brings me to the next point - the concept of 'non-permanent squadmates'. I can only say in response to this: PLEASE NO! Legion appeared to be in the E3 footage of the attack on a Reaper base, but it was clear that he was not a squadmate, since Garrus and Liara were fighting alongside you. The same with Mordin in the other footage (at the Microsoft conference). I really hate the concept of half the squadmates you have in the game not coming back to the Normandy with you. It completely rids the game of what I perceive to be a squadmate - someone who sticks by you (and whose character is fully explored) to the end of the game (or their deaths, as the case may be).

I know for a fact the producers have been talking about this concept of non-permanent squadmates - I'm not just conjecturing this. And what may back this up - to my dismay - is that they have also stated that the ME2 DLC was them 'experimenting with ideas for ME3'.

Well I loved DLC such as the LotSB, but if this means, like Liara in ME2, all I'll get to see of Legion is in one side mission (or story mission) where I get control of him (well it, or them, to be precise), I won't be very happy. Furthermore, the latest DLC, the one that is essential to the start of ME3 - The Arrival - didn't even HAVE squadmates. If this is an idea that is being experimented with to any extent for ME2, please get rid of it!

Now I understand with the massive amount of variables generated from both previous games, it would be a programming nightmare to have a game in which virtually all the squadmates of ME2 (and Wrex/Ashley/Kaidan) could be full time squadmates for some players and not even present (due to their previous deaths) to others. But what can be done is to not disregard what I believe to be the most important aspect of the Mass Effect franchise: a loyal, unchanging squad (no mission-only squadmates) that is yours to command, interact and even romance till the bitter end.

[Shepard Lives]

Yeah, I too fear the presence of non-permanent squadmates might lead to half-arsed character development for permanent squadmates.

We're just going to have to trust Bio on this one.

[AlexB1001]

Shepard Lives wrote...

Yeah, I too fear the presence of non-permanent squadmates might lead to half-arsed character development for permanent squadmates.

We're just going to have to trust Bio on this one.

Not to mention any mission with a non-permanent squadmate might mean one less mission with a permanent squadmate. 'Tis all about character development for me...

[Chewin]

AlexB1001 wrote...
To start with, the game's producers have stated that they want a smaller cast of permanent squadmates in the final game. I don't have a huge problem with this (although I loved the huge range of characters ME2 offered), and if nothing else it gives Bioware a chance to flesh out a smaller amount of characters even more. But the problem in this is that I have squadmates from the last two games that I am desperate to return, but with less squadmates this will definetely be impossible. Maybe you are happy that Liara and Tali are returning, but I'd much rather have Samara and Legion by my side throughout the whole game.

I really hate the concept of half the squadmates you have in
the game not coming back to the Normandy with you. It completely rids
the game of what I perceive to be a squadmate - someone who sticks by
you (and whose character is fully explored) to the end of the game (or
their deaths, as the case may be).

That's for me a good reason why we're gonna have a smaller team. This gives BW more time to develop each one of your squadmates, a chance to make them important and hopefully different from each other. There will possibly be more banter with them and so on.

But I see that your problem is that you don't get that particular character to be a full time squadmate. This is also IMO a good way of developing the characters. If each one of your squadmates will be doing different things for you in the game, they will become more unique. Take me for example, I'm not particularly fond od Samara, never used her on almost any mission. If she would be on the Normandy as a full time squadmate, I would never use her. Now if BW puts her on a planet X and with a Y as a reason why I'm there, and if BW does it right and interesting, I will probably like her more. This way every character becomes unique to the story, not just the ones you want with you on missions.

Also, if we would have every single previous squadmate in ME1 and 2, plus new members, the character selection screen would get crowded.I mean, it would end up like this:

../../../uploads_user/2465000/2464671/123002.jpg

^Do not want

Furthermore, the latest DLC, the one that is essential to the start of ME3 - The Arrival - didn't even HAVE squadmates. If this is an idea that is being experimented with to any extent for ME2, please get rid of it!

BW couldn't get (and probably wouldn't pay) every single voice actor to do lines for the Arrival. yes, it was annoying, but I hardly think there will be just as big solo moments as in Arrival.

[Da Mecca]

Hell yeah Shepard better be the focus, I have no time for Squadmated emotional problems unlike ME3.

Shepard is not a life counselor, he is a human being with problems just like anyone else.

[Jedi31293]

That was a very well thought out and articulately-written statement, OP. I see where you're coming from, and agree with many of your point. However, there's not much we can do at this point but "trust Bio on this one" as Shepard Lives said.

Modifié par Jedi31293, 07 juin 2011 - 02:43 .

[Hathur]

I blame the fact that Garrus had the least dialogue of any squad member (excluding DLC characters Zaeed & Kasumi of course) on the fact that there were so many squaddies, they had to cut / limit dialogue somewhere... and they chose Garrus to be the one stuck in..... <shudder> ... calibrations. 

So I for one am happy with a smaller, more focused team... means more time spent with other characters (hopefully) that can be explored in greater detail / depth... so long as Garrus is a permanent squaddie and not relegated to temp squaddie (in which case I'll go on a murderous rampage with a rusted spoon somewhere in Edmonton) 

Modifié par Hathur, 07 juin 2011 - 02:49 .

[Tezlaa]

I think that the overall scope of ME3 is going to be much bigger than ME2, and that many characters are going to have to be given smaller roles, not because they can't carry on their stories, but because there are much bigger things at stake.
What I'm trying to say is that the Reaper threat, that has only been viewed as myth by the vast majority of the galaxy, is finally here, and going on character side missions instead of uniting, and saving the Milky Way is not the way ME3's story should be played.

The concept of non-permanent squad mates, in my opinon is a good one. Allowing Mordin to help us on his home planet with the genophage and saving the Krogan princess satisfies our needs to continue and finish his story arc, whilst contributing to saving the galaxy. The same will likely go for Legion, as he will be instrumental in Shepards attempts to bring peace to the Geth and the Quarians.
Allowing our old squaddies to help in this way will integrate their story arcs from ME2 into the galactic effort against the Reapers, whilst making their characters much more interesting and memorable.

On the other hand, there are some characters that I am worried about. These are Samara, Thane, Jacob and the DLC characters, Kasumi and Zaeed. From the top of my head, I cannot think of a way they could contribute to the galactic effort and carry on their story arcs.

Is Kasumi gonna steal a Reaper?
Is Thane going to unite the galaxy by being a better father?

Anyone got any ideas?

Modifié par Tezlaa, 07 juin 2011 - 02:57 .

[Whyp_2]

Chewin3 wrote...
That's for me a good reason why we're gonna have a smaller team. This gives BW more time to develop each one of your squadmates, a chance to make them important and hopefully different from each other. There will possibly be more banter with them and so on.

But I see that your problem is that you don't get that particular character to be a full time squadmate. This is also IMO a good way of developing the characters. If each one of your squadmates will be doing different things for you in the game, they will become more unique. Take me for example, I'm not particularly fond od Samara, never used her on almost any mission. If she would be on the Normandy as a full time squadmate, I would never use her. Now if BW puts her on a planet X and with a Y as a reason why I'm there, and if BW does it right and interesting, I will probably like her more. This way every character becomes unique to the story, not just the ones you want with you on missions.

Also, if we would have every single previous squadmate in ME1 and 2, plus new members, the character selection screen would get crowded.I mean, it would end up like this:

+1

Casey said the same thing in the GI article. And I completely agree with you about the character development. Though Legion could have been a squadmate, we saw so little about him in ME2

[Destroy Raiden_]

ME2 was the opposite OP the squadmembers where the main focus and shep was just there which alot of people hated. He's the main character not some back seat rider here he should be and should've always been the main focus of the series they can still have shep interact meaningfully with his squadmates but not become sir idiot like he did in ME2. I for one like the idea that shep is finally being the main character again sense he seemed to take a break in 2.

[VoidCabbage]

Well I like the non permanent squad thing. It means that I'll be able to play with more characters and not be confined to the fewer squad mates they decide to make full time.

Also if Legion isn't ever a squadmate but just helping you out as part of a quest with his ship or whatever the hell is going on there. Thats good too... its getting a character people like in the game whilst not cluttering up the full time roster.

Also the idea that having non permanent squadmates will make the characters more shallow.. is just conjecture. Its totally possible they can write a story that is fulfilling that includes all the previous characters.

I like what was going on with Legion and Mordin. These are two characters who have their own goals and it doesn't necessarily make sense that they would stick with Sheperd the whole time.. but its awesome that they can be involved in the story in a meaningful way nonetheless.

[AlexB1001]

VoidCabbage wrote...

Well I like the non permanent squad thing. It means that I'll be able to play with more characters and not be confined to the fewer squad mates they decide to make full time.

Also if Legion isn't ever a squadmate but just helping you out as part of a quest with his ship or whatever the hell is going on there. Thats good too... its getting a character people like in the game whilst not cluttering up the full time roster.

Also the idea that having non permanent squadmates will make the characters more shallow.. is just conjecture. Its totally possible they can write a story that is fulfilling that includes all the previous characters.

I like what was going on with Legion and Mordin. These are two characters who have their own goals and it doesn't necessarily make sense that they would stick with Sheperd the whole time.. but its awesome that they can be involved in the story in a meaningful way nonetheless.

You and a lot of other posters on this thread have made very good points.

I guess what we want can be condensed into this:

(1) Non-permanent squad members are a good way of allowing characters' story arcs to be concluded without having to have them along for no great reason (as long as this doesn't greatly encroach on mission time with permanent squadmates).

(2) The ME3 team is smaller than ME2, but each character (especially Garrus!) has a lot of dialogue and is explored and fleshed out to a great extent. So no one, EVER, will be in the middle of some calibrations instead of wanting to talk to you.

(3) Legion should be a squadmate (I just snuck that one in here).

Incidentally, on another note, did anyone complete ME2 before the majority of the DLC came out and then found the rest of the game was sort of awkward? For instance the fact you might have destroyed the Collector's Base yet you still have the Illusive Man's ship and are still doing missions for him (though he is getting ready to kill you, according to the ME3 plot)? Or that nothing actually really happens on your ship - Kelly repeats the same things over and over, or you unlock some dialogue you hadn't before with, say, Thane, and have him reference the fact he hopes you'll survive 'the suicide mission'?