dewayne31 wrote...
Could he bew refering to that Tali could be dead?
I think its partly that, but its also imo to keep things as vague and non commital as they can.
They don't want to actually admit that say for example all but the VS,Vega,Liara and any other potential new squadmate are permanent and everyone else is temp because it'll create a backlash (i'm not saying thats definetly what they mean rather if it was the case its much better to be vague and confusing until later).
They went this route with me2, question after question was asked about the VS, Liara, Wrex. and we got the same non commital, take it anway you like type of answers until much nearer release when we got the Wrex has an awesome cameo and Liara and the Vs. wouldn't be squadmates this time because they were being saved for me3.
Personally i find myself annoyed but not surprised by what they say and how they say it, it just reeks of exactly what they did and said before imo, and you just have to see their handling of me1 characters in me2 to see how that turned out.
When it comes to potentially dead characters it seems like bioware choose the less is more easy to fit scenario, so if thats what they intend to do then we really should have seen it coming and are only have ourselves to blame for not accepting what could be true.
No matter how you look at it or how its implemented, creating scenarios where squadmates would only be temporary is giving less time and effort to the resolution of those character arcs. People can say oh but character A would be off doing so and so and character b has this to do, but again they're missing the point imo.
Every single character in mass effect could have another reason why they aren't part of a squad with Shepard, all of them nobody excluded could have a part to play and a role elsewhere, but they don't. Shepard comes along and character A/B or C drops whatever else is going on in their life or finds a reason why accompanying Shepard is best for them, the galaxy, the univers whatever.
By turning people who already followed in this route into people who no longer have the same reasoning or excuse to follow in this route, your turning a character from a squadmate into an Npc, the reasoning behind it is only as valid as the reason why they were squadmates in the first place. Anderson is an NPC, even an important NPC, he knows how important Shepard's mission has been in 2 games, but despite Shepard asking him twice Anderson gives reasons why he can't come along which is fine he's an NPC, the others from me1 and me2 do not, which is where the difference lies.
People can say ah but Tali could have an important role to play with the quarians and yes indeed she could but she could also have said in me2, "jeez Shepard i'd love to come along and help on this big ol suicide mission your on but i'm about to get exiled and my people want to try me for being a traitor so i'll have to sit this one out" the fact as we now is she didn't. Instead Shepard went with her, helped resolve the situation and lo and behold Tali was free to continue as a squadmate and participate in the SM.
Its not a question of should characters move on and have other things to do, characters do that they're called NPC's and their roles are important, but not as important as Squadmembers who instead with Shepard's help resolve their little situations and continue along in their squadmate roles.
Bioware changing these roles or creating scenarios to justify why a character can't be a fulltime squadmate is not because the storyline must be consistent and characters must act accordingly rather its fitting characters and storylines into what they want to do regarding who or how many people are squadmates. Which is fine and dandy but don't dress it up as anything other than creating a fulltime squadmember role for people who may or may not be in everyones game was too much like hardwork, therefore we decided to go this route.
Retour en haut
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
