78 réponses à ce sujet

[alperez]

fenix8081 wrote...

Exactly. I'm even thinking of Garrus especially. It doesn't really seem like he fits in with his own people very well. If they try to tell me that he's off rallying the Turians, I'm not going to believe it. True, he's played an important role in helping Shepard, but he's not a huge figure with his people like Mordin, Tali, Samara, or Wrex would be. Granted it looks like he's going to be with Shepard most, if not all, of ME3 there are a lot of other characters whose reasons would probably come across as pretty weak.

We have that situation with Garrus and Tali, not only have the past 2 games made it seem like no matter what they have going on in their own lives or what their priorities maybe but that all of this is relagated to almost insignificance once Shepard comes calling. Also in both cases your basically shown that without Shepard's direct help they both would have bad endings, Arcangel on Omega and Tali on haestrom.

So like you point out we get to me3 and suddenly either or both these characters suddenly can't join up with Shepard for whatever reason or join up temporarily only to leave for whatever reason and we'll be sitting there like hello, seriously this is the best you can come up with.

It works the same with other characters also, like you say some may have genuine reasons why they won't be full squadmates and i don't think i or anyone else expect every single character to be full squadmates, but if the only ones are the ones we already know about then it really does begin to stretch believabilty to breakingpoint.

I don't think anyone has a major issue with starting out with the squad it looks like we're starting out with and over the course of the game meeting up with old squadmembers, some rejoining temporarily before going off to do something important. It makes sense that this would happen with a lot of the me2 specific crew but if this is the case with them all then the reasoning is not storyline related, it has nothing to do with the roles these characters need to play in this great galactic war.

Plainly and simply the reasoning would be that because a character could have been killed in a previous game it became too hard to implement them as full squadmates so instead we'll give you a reduced role for these characters.

I sincerly hope i'm wrong and that Bioware are just biding their time before announcing that Miranda or Jack or whoever is also a permanent squadmember or that once we play me3 we'll find that this indeed is the case. i fear though that Bioware's silence on this issue and their we can't tell you because it spoils the storyline (of a game that in so many ways has been spoiled worse already and will no doubt be spoiled even more come release) is all too familiar to those of us who bought me1 and me2 and have seen them do this before.

[Spanky Magoo]

I would be cool if we could have our pick "with few exceptions" like mordin for example I could see in a support role but i could also see that for liara and tali doing thier own part. I could see garrus, Grunt, Miranda, Samara my go to squad being permanent though they really dont have anything better to do so im hopeful but i wont be surprised if tali refuses to leave lol.

[ink07]

I am disappointed that there seem to be too many humans. I expected a lot more aliens and not a "per race" representative in companion characters.

[DarkDragon777]

Wow. Really, I think the squad list is absolutely prefect. They couldn't have done it better. All the characters I liked are returning.

[alperez]

DarkDragon777 wrote...

Wow. Really, I think the squad list is absolutely prefect. They couldn't have done it better. All the characters I liked are returning.

Don't get me wrong i'm very happy that characters i like are returning, I just feel that it makes more sense that the final game in the series would have a balance between me1 specific and me2 specific characters.

The worst part of it is though that not every single person who played mass effect actually likes the characters that are announced so far, so bioware are basically sticking 2 fingers up to them in some respects (while others may be fine with this i find i am not) and thats without taking into account the Ps3 me2 players who are getting characters they have real backstory with or history with.

A compromise of the 2 where we get some from both games as full squadmembers but the rest as temps would work a lot better and be a lot fairer to all fans of the series and is still something i hope for.

[LisuPL]

Only Garrus and Tali matter - they are THE CREW, anyone else is just an addition to the crew.

[The C Trayne]

@alperez
finally someone who speaks with reason, i am finding myself agreeing with you on every point you are making here my friend. the fact that what we see is understandable but unfortunetly the best we are going to get because allowing us to make any squad we wanted with the available characters would be ridiculous to program with that many different combinations.

i do wish they implemented some of the me2 characters a bit more... i mean why bring them in so deep with me2 then just have them for 1 maybe 2 missions in the me3? oh well we'll see what we get and have to live with it

Modifié par The C Trayne, 05 juillet 2011 - 04:53 .

[Zubie]

I'm liking the lineup so far. Of course, I preferred the ME1 squad way more than the ME2 squad.....Toss Mordin in there and it will be perfect.

[alperez]

C trayne.

Just simply adding 2 characters to the confirmed squad makes most of what i've said so far obsolete, the simple act of picking 2 me2 specific characters and adding them as permanent squadmembers. So what if the 2 they pick aren't alive in every playthrough that just means that the SM actually has consequences.

So we get the base crew we've been told about and then at some point in the game we get a Miranda or Jack or another character that doesn't actually have a galatically huge role to play (ala Mordin or Legion) the rest we get temporarily and if they died in your playthrough tough ******, you make do with what you get instead.

At least that way it increases replayability (if you haven't a playthrough were the 2 characters they give you are alive you need to get one) and it also satisfies fans of me2 by giving those players characters they may want on their squad also.

Take the me2 crew, temp the dlc characters, temp characters like Legion and Mordin and pick the most popular from the rest say for example Miranda and Grunt. Add these to Liara,vs,vega,garrus,tali and one more new character and you got a potential crew of 8.

If not all of those characters are alive in your playthrough you get a minimum of 4 rising to a maximum of 8 and at least both sets of fans are somewhat happy.

Yes i know not everyone likes the same me2 characters but i'd rather settle for 2 picked by bioware as full squadmates than everyone being temped.

If bioware don't go this route and instead we get a basically me1 specific fullsquadmate cast with temproles for everyone else there will be serious hell to play come release.

A part of me thinks this will be how they'll go and they're really just holding back and back until they decide its time to release the info, to go the other route and annoy me2 fans and completely abandon ps3 me2 fans forcing them to play with characters they either don't know or in some cases don't like is something only idiots would do.

Then again bioware have been getting slightly more idiotic so who knows.

[ZeroCrewX]

The C Trayne wrote...

ZeroCrewX wrote...

The C Trayne wrote...

ya i know my comp is having problems at the moment...

second, how is suggesting more variety in your permanent squad a trolling statement? i'm not the only one to be suggesting it. and it would make sense to be able to pick your 5 or 6 squad mates from all the previous ones since everyone could make the team they wanted, however it would just be too much work to make the game.

i apologize for using common sense

No. IF you were using common sense you would know something like that is 1- not plausible 2- not practical and 3-not economical

So let me get this straight, you want the devs to design a whole game, and being able to work a whole playthrough with literally 100 squad combinations, then record sound for EVERY single one of them, then animate them all, basically its like making 10 games packed in one game. Think much? Do you know how much that game would cost for us to buy? Not to mention the insane amount of money and TIME needed to make that?

No you are not using common sense or not thinking rationally for that matter.

i understand that hence why i said right in my post that it wont happen... my point was that it would be a cool idea and would make sense if it happened but there was no way it could happen... Read much?

Really? Then why say "Sorry for using common sense"? or why say "it would make sense"? Work better at covering your tracks or altering outcomes. Common sense is exactly what you were NOT using.

[The C Trayne]

ZeroCrewX wrote...

The C Trayne wrote...

ZeroCrewX wrote...

The C Trayne wrote...

ya i know my comp is having problems at the moment...

second, how is suggesting more variety in your permanent squad a trolling statement? i'm not the only one to be suggesting it. and it would make sense to be able to pick your 5 or 6 squad mates from all the previous ones since everyone could make the team they wanted, however it would just be too much work to make the game.

i apologize for using common sense

No. IF you were using common sense you would know something like that is 1- not plausible 2- not practical and 3-not economical

So let me get this straight, you want the devs to design a whole game, and being able to work a whole playthrough with literally 100 squad combinations, then record sound for EVERY single one of them, then animate them all, basically its like making 10 games packed in one game. Think much? Do you know how much that game would cost for us to buy? Not to mention the insane amount of money and TIME needed to make that?

No you are not using common sense or not thinking rationally for that matter.

i understand that hence why i said right in my post that it wont happen... my point was that it would be a cool idea and would make sense if it happened but there was no way it could happen... Read much?

Really? Then why say "Sorry for using common sense"? or why say "it would make sense"? Work better at covering your tracks or altering outcomes. Common sense is exactly what you were NOT using.

jeez really like pushing this dont you lol... it was common sense because although it would have been really cool, and would have made sense (if it could be done) i understand that it cant even though so many people would have loved to see it

Modifié par The C Trayne, 05 juillet 2011 - 09:50 .

[DarkDragon777]

No, only Ashley and Liara matter.

[Phaelducan]

Out of curiosity, I wonder which ME2 squad members die the most on the suicide mission, percentage-wise across all platforms. If, for some reason, any particular character dies at a much higher rate that other characters, it will be interesting to see if they still make it as a squad option for ME3.

[Ellyria]

It would be nice if they did something similar to Star Ocean 3. There were six characters (not counting the protagonist) that would always join your party, but then there were four temporary characters. Of those four, you could choose two of them to come with you and be permanent teammates.

I'm sure it would be a lot harder to implement in ME, as SO3 didn't have the massive amount of variables and choices that ME does, but it would be nice to be able to choose which two ME2 squaddies you'd have on your team, instead of being told which ones we're getting.

[Fiery Phoenix]

S.A.K wrote...

AngelicMachinery wrote...

I heard James Vega is going to be fabulous.

Thats what I thought about Jacob. Now look how that turned out!

Jacob was neither a bad character nor a good one; he is exactly in the middle. I expect James to be just that, and I wouldn't mind it.

[ZeroCrewX]

Luna Siwora wrote...

LisuPL wrote...

Only Garrus and Tali matter - they are THE CREW, anyone else is just an addition to the crew.

Suuuure...

Your sig is shamefuly (to me - a guy) AWESOME!
Where did the talimancers come from dammit?? There was no such issue during ME1, then they got the romance and the world went crazy, don't get me wrong Tali is a great romance option, but to command such fanatisism? It's pathetic.

To the OP, your reply made absolutely no sense, its like I ask you what time it is and you reply with Purple.

[Tannerblackbird]

alperez wrote...

Tannerblackbird wrote...
*snip*

.

There are numerous reasons why a character would only join up and then go off and do different things is basically the argument your using here, which while true to an extent kinda misses the point a tad.

Any character can have a reason why they wouldn't be with Shepard trying to stop the reaper threat, Ash, Liara, Vega any of these too could have a genuine reason why joining with Shepard just doesn't fit into their immediate plans or a reason why they may have something better to do. However they don't which is exactly the point, they meet up with Shepard, bring whatever personal issues and goals they may have and along the way these too get sorted out whilst allowing them to stay part of the main overall mission.

Once you bring in certain rules for one set of characters then every other set of rules also has to follow along, so if Ash (someone who in me2 because of *coughs* her pro alliance views) can't come along and help Shepard fight the collectors but come me3 can suddenly be able to be a fulltime squadmember putting aside her own feelings and helping Shepard through to the end then why can't Miranda or Jack etc.

If characters right from the getgo only worked with Shepard temporarily then its fine and dandy but they don't, like i said they bring their own issues to bear while working with Shepard and along the way everything gets sorted out. So suddenly we skip to me3 and lo and behold they can't do this anymore even though the threat being faced is that much more important, that doesn't make any sort of sense.

Once you bring in certain rules for one set of characters then every other set of rules also has to follow along, so if Ash (someone who in me2 because of *coughs* her pro alliance views) can't come along and help Shepard fight the collectors but come me3 can suddenly be able to be a fulltime squadmember putting aside her own feelings and helping Shepard through to the end then why can't Miranda or Jack etc.

If characters right from the getgo only worked with Shepard temporarily then its fine and dandy but they don't, like i said they bring their own issues to bear while working with Shepard and along the way everything gets sorted out. So suddenly we skip to me3 and lo and behold they can't do this anymore even though the threat being faced is that much more important, that doesn't make any sort of sense.

So what we get is a created reasoning to justify it, now this works in relation to say Mordin or Wrex or Grunt or some of the others but in the case of most it just doesn't cut the same kind of ice. For example Garrus or Tali could have proper logical reasons why this time round they can't be squadmates but considering in 2 games they put these aside this time the reasoning would like a bit cliched and tired.

For the reasoning to work it would have to involve every single character or by default it makes out certain characters have a lesser reason to do anything else with their lives or play such an insignificant role overall that they can forget playing any other part other than being a squadmember on Shepard's team. Its illogical and inconceived and thats just based on simple characterisation.

Now when you add in things like they already had issues but put them aside to work with Shepard in the first place, or they already had roles they could have played elsewhere but instead worked with Shepard it gets even more stupid.

I wasn't talking about personal goals or motivations.  I'm talking about Shepard actually being a commander and getting the most out of his people.  I don't think it makes much sense to have Tali and Garrus sitting at their stations on the Normandy when they could be on missions to inform and rally their people.  I could list other tasks each character could be performing at the outset of the reaper invasion but I think you get my point. 

Again this misses my point.  I'm not suggesting that the crew of ME2 would suddenly not want to be with Shepard on the Normandy, only that it might not be the most efficient use of personnel.  Especially since Shepard is supposed to be appearing at a court marshall at the beginning of ME3.  I understand you like these characters, but if I was Shepard and they could be put to better use somewhere other than the hold of the Normandy while I face a court marshall, then I would send them on that mission whether they objected or not.

As of right now we don't have anything in terms of what the story will be so this is just you guessing at what might happen.  That's all well and good, these forums are here partly for that purpose, but it really doesn't add up to much.  Unless that you're asserting that ANYTHING the writing staff at bioware comes up with in regards to making a squadmate temporary would be cliched and tired.  In that case there's really no way to counter that since it's a completely subjective assessment.

Since anything a character does should be backed up by some kind of reasoning I can't say I see you're argument here.  I see that you don't like that you won't get as wide a selection of characters as you'd like and that's fine.  There's nothing to suggest that situation would have anything to do with writing however.  It's an issue of time and money, not narrative.

Modifié par Tannerblackbird, 05 juillet 2011 - 07:56 .

[The C Trayne]

Phaelducan wrote...

Out of curiosity, I wonder which ME2 squad members die the most on the suicide mission, percentage-wise across all platforms. If, for some reason, any particular character dies at a much higher rate that other characters, it will be interesting to see if they still make it as a squad option for ME3.

i believe mordin has the lowest "defensive" score and thus during the final part of the SM he is the first to die if the overall defensive score of the squad left to hold the line isnt high enough.  after that its tali, kasumi, and jack i believe the next three.  dont know that precise order though

as it looks though mordin and tali are definetly in the game and since jack is getting revamped we can assume she will be as well... no one knows about kasumi tho 

[alperez]

Tannerblackbird

I think we're getting our wires crossed a little here, i'm not suggesting that every single character should be on the normandy right for the getgo just waiting for Shepard's trial to finish and then once it is we go off to do whatever.

I fully expect the only people to be with Shepard from the beginning to be the perma squad we've heard about. Once the trial is over you then start on the path to stopping the reapers and along the way you re-meet your old squadmates, help with a mission and then what happens?

After the mission ends the squadmate gives you some excuse as to why they can't come with and you say your goodbyes while they go off to do the ultra important thing that can't be done with Shepard and must be handled alone, thats where i begin to take issue.

See that scenario only works if A. Its every single character shepard meets (which we know it isn't) and B. if the storyline of a character actually has a genuine galatic importance.

If Ashley or Liara (the shadowbroker) vega (whoever he is) Garrus (whose homeworld is under direct attack) or Tali (whose issues involving geth and quarians could be pivotal) can somehow put aside all of this to join with Shepard then why can't any other character you meet?

So Miranda (has cerberus issues), Jack (mental ones), Jacob (blandness problems) etc. meet up at some point with Shepard do a mission or 2 as temp squadmates but then suddenly have a large galatic role and are a better use of Shepards resources elsewhere and this makes sense how exactly?

What i was trying to point out was that any character could have another reason why they may be more useful elsewhere, why they may have a role to play that means they can't be squadmates but what normally happens is that they're role, their goal, their resourceful usefulness is put aside and they join with Shepard which allows them to actually achieve whatever it is they were supposed to achieve in the first place.

I'm not arguing that every single me2 squadmate must return in a full squadmate role because it would not only be impractical but it eliminate clearly defined paths that have already been set in motion. It makes sense that some would have other roles to play and that we would only have these characters as temp squadmates.

What doesn't make sense is that every single me2 specific character would fall into this scenario, that would be doing a disservice to us both logically and from a storyline standpoint and would prove that the reasoning was because of what could have potentally happened to these characters in the SM.

But worse even than that it would be a direct slap in the face of fans of me2 and ps3 fans who didn't get to play me1. If bioware go this route then i and other will be severly dissappointed in both them and in mass effect as a series.

We don't know though that this is how they will go and believe me i hope i'm way off base and my concerns are baseless.

[Garrison2009]

I personally am not disappointed at all at the lineup of squad-mates thus far. I've been itching to get my old squad back together since the beginning of ME2 and it looks like I'll finally be able tog et most of them at least. The Suicide Mission 'Dirty Dozen' squad was great as well, but I missed the rest of my old team. Looking forward to getting them back.

[JamieCOTC]

Tali: Well, this is it. It all ends here.
Liara: Indeed.  We've come so far together. 
Ash: I wonder what'll happen when it's all over? Mini-golf, maybe? 
femShep: I was thinking about shopping? as per usual. I'm having a wicked shoe craving.
Garrus: The galaxy is definitely doomed. 

apologies to Joss Whedon and no, I'm not disappointed. 

Modifié par JamieCOTC, 05 juillet 2011 - 11:25 .

[Tannerblackbird]

@Alperez

I can see where you're coming from, and I wouldn't want Bioware to shoe horn any kind of narrative in there just to fit the way they programmed the game. I suppose I just take issue with any kind of overly definitive assessment of the writing before the game has come out.

I would be TOTALLY disappointed if I didn't get to see characters from ME2 in ME3, I thought it was superior to ME1 in so many ways and I wish they'd go back and make ME1 over in the style of ME2. It's almost a chore to start a new character in that game and make it through to the end to get to go and play ME2 without the forced decisions beginning.

I just don't count out the idea that Bioware won't use all of those characters as temporary squadmates in order to tell a huge, bombastic story that will live up to the hype created by the story so far. I don't count out that they could do this and leave me completely happy. I want the interactions between characters and story to flow and be satisfying more than I need them to be available for squad selection the whole game.

I take nothing for granted in this game and I think it would be amazing (but sad of course) if a character like Jack (for example Jack fans) died mid game because of a decision my Shepard made. Would it then ruin the game because I can't use her for missions?

I think we can both agree if the reasons for keeping characters off your perma team are "Ugh I can't come because I totally have to go over here now...SPACE MAGIC" we'll all be pissed. If the reasons for this are varied and well thought out, I wouldn't count the decision to have them as a temporary member to equate to bad writing. Simply put: let the writing speak for itself and then decide. 

I think my ideal game would have every character that's been usable have the following options depending on how you make in game decisions: A) lost forever either by death or by you doing something that brutalling violates their moral code, part of your temp squad until a mission is over and their needed elsewhere, or C) a permanent member if you play things really well or handle their problem in a really skillfull way.  I realize though that Bioware doesn't really have the resources for this so I'll wait and see what they do before I say "If they do it this way, it'll be terrible."

Modifié par Tannerblackbird, 06 juillet 2011 - 01:19 .

[alperez]

Tanner, sorry for the delay in responding (time zones suck).

Bioware do have incredibly gifted writers and do know how to make a complex narrative work (otherwise we probably wouldn't be here) i didn't mean to come off as dismissive or saying that i was prejudging a story i know so little about.

It was more of a what if scenario i was trying to put across, more of a if this is how it is then its not something i want or would enjoy.

We've been told time and again that everyone who survives up to this point would play a role in me3 and that some of these include a temp squadmate role and i have no real issue with that, its more a question of does that mean all the me2 specific crew?

See thats where i take issue because if that is the case then its not imo because of how the story would flow organically but more because of what could happen to these characters dictating making a story fit those parameters.

If every character who could die in the SM is reduced to a temp squadmate role to me its not because thats a role that fits into the overall narrative but the overall narritive is being changed to suit a reduced role if you get me.

I have no problem with most of the me2 specific squadmembers being used in this way and no particular preference for which ones would not be but if they are all used like this then things get annoying for me. Then it becomes something to me that doesn't make storyline sense, characters being given created roles where they really shouldn't be.

For example there are lots of me2 specific characters such as Legion, Mordin, Samara etc that it makes perfect sense to me whereby a role other than full squadmate works. But in the case of some others then it really doesn't, now if you add in a character like Tali (who may be a permanent squadmember) who should have a role to play elsewhere but may not then it becomes even more confusing and illogical.

I'm not saying Tali is a permanent squadmember just using her as an example of where storyline sense and logic starts to get mixed up.

I have no problem with characters dying because of choices i made and this being the reason why they are only temp squaddies or characters not being available because of choices i've made or may make, what i do have a problem with is creating storylines to justify their absences for reasons other than it makes sense to the story.

In your ideal game scenario i have no issue with A) or with C0 obviously but i do with if like i say it doesn't make sense overall.Bioware's record in making storyline sense in relation to characters is patchy at best, Wrex's reasoning works while Liara's only partly does and the Vs. when matched against Garrus and Tali seems particularly forced.

Again though i'm not saying every single character from me2 or the vast majority of them should return as full squadmembers, i never hoped or expecte that would be the case. I just feel that some of them should return, not only because imo it makes storyline sense but because by them not returning Bioware are reducing their roles for convieniance rather than for storyline purposes.

Mainly though its a question of balance imo, some people me included really want the me1 crew back which it looks like we'll get, but some don't or want characters from me2 to return. By overloading the squad with me1 characters and reducing the roles of me2 ones Bioware are basically saying to me2 fans and to ps3 me2 fans that they shouldn't have got attached to any of those characters because we already decided that regardless of opinion or story, their roles were to be reduced.