Re: Jack adopting, I could see it happening, actually, even with her ME2 mindset, but not necessarily as something that occurs "officially", so to speak. So, I don't see her, say, explicitly going out of her way to pick up an orphan to raise as her own out of some desire to be a mother or anything, but I could see her taking somebody under her wing under more or less the same mindset that one would pick up a stray. Perhaps it would be out of pity or sympathy or what have you, but the key is that I think she would eventually perhaps develop a certain attachment to them, a yearning for protecting them and caring for them as one would a child. It seems to me that this is more or less what happened with her students, at least going by her notes on the datapad in Grissom Academy.
Re: the ME3 squad, to be honest, I like it just fine. It is not as rich or eclectic as the ME2 squad, naturally, but in truth I think few party-based RPG games feature parties as interesting as ME2. ME2 is the only ME that is very much
about the squad. I mean...the plot, such as it is? Silly, stupid, a shoddily put together skeletal structure over which the devs could lay over the true meat of the game, its real focus: pure, distilled characterization. ME2 is the only ME game whose "spine" was comprised largely of a) meeting new characters ("recruitment missions"),
getting to know them a bit better over the course of the game ("Normandy conversations") and c) eventually gaining a greater insight into their history and the things shaped them into the people they are today ("loyalty missions"). If you skimped out on any of these three things, the length of your game time would be cut noticeably shorter, because these are very much the things that the game was
about. ME2 was not a game of large scale events or cerebral concepts, it was a game about people - a cast of characters - and in order for it to be truly compelling, these characters had to be extremely diverse, and rich, and interesting. To that end, you had
twelve squadmates - more, frankly, than you ever needed, or probably wound up using - and they each came with unique voices, unique personalities, unique backgrounds and priorities and moral compasses and perspectives on things. Almost every aspect of ME2 was geared towards this, this exploration of characters rather than ideas, and as a result of that, it is arguably the only ME game where it can be said that even the traditional love scenes that occur towards the end of the game play an integral role in the character arcs that the love interest-squadmates experience throughout the game.
ME3 is different. It's not a game about people, and it isn't a game about world-building and the speculative exploration of hard science fiction concepts (as the first game was). It is, however, terribly charming, self-aware and dynamic, and its focus greatly benefits from that. I would argue that ME3's focus - at least as it pertains to the squad - is not "people" but "dynamics", and to that end it heavily emphasizes bidirectional communication between Shepard and his or her squadmates, and between the squadmates themselves. Conversation and dialogue are lighter and more naturalistic (aided in part by the large amounts of auto-dialogue in the game). There is a greater emphasis on friendship, humor and camaraderie. Romance-specific dialogue is generally a bit more overt and visceral than it's been on previous games. And so forth. ME3 is not about characters or concepts, but about the systems that are created between two people once they begin to interact, be those people Shepard and a squadmate, or two squadmates, or a squadmate and other NPCs (ME3's also more or less the only game that goes out of its way to indicate that, well, squadmates actually have lives and perspectives and things to do outside of talking to Shepard). And, you know, I think that's all good stuff. The ME3 squad is not, on the whole, as numerous or as interesting as the ME2 one, but they are good, well-written, well-executed characters, and I think it's also interesting that unlike previous games, their development as characters is not shackled by almost anything. None of the ME3 guys have anything resembling personal quests other than, literally, hanging out with Shepard every now and then. Their character development doesn't hinge on the existence of a romance. In fact, they serve little purpose in the game other than just...to be your friends, and to do the sorts of things with you that friends do together. Talk, commiserate, grieve, have fun, comfort, flirt and so forth. It's good, I think.
I'd love to have my ME2 guys back (well, some of them, at least). They're still my favorite squad in the series, and always will be, and I do genuinely believe that some of them got shafted quite heavily and undeservedly in ME3. And, of course, I would pay all the money in my ever-emptying wallet in order to have them around some more. But, you know, I think there may be a certain argument to be made that BioWare can and should, also, strive to move forward. Creating and exploring new characters and ideas and so forth, as opposed to simply revisiting old ones. Hell, if they hadn't done that, we wouldn't have had the ME2 squad in the first place, and none of these conversations would be taking place. I'm sure lots of ME1 devotees felt this way when they saw most of their guys set aside (in some cases quite brutally) in favor of the faux-Dirty Dozen.
Modifié par Padt, 26 juillet 2012 - 08:21 .
Retour en haut
