896 réponses à ce sujet

[Zu Long]

Han Shot First wrote...

As for escoting to the Normandy crew back...

Garrus, Grunt or Jacob wouldn't be good choices because they are three of your heavies. Their abilities are better served holding that line against incredible odds, than escorting back crewmen who were essentially out of the fight at that point. You need to send someone back of course, but it should be someone who is less crucial for holding that line.

Just a note here, but when you are playing the game the first time, assuming you haven't read a guide or otherwise gotten hold of prior info, you have NO IDEA that the holding the line situation is going to come up later. You don't even know that the person you send back is going to survive- The first time, I thought it likely you could lose crew-members or even the squadie if you didn't send a one man army to escort everyone back. (Which is why I sent Grunt, and Tali ended up dead.)

So your logic falls apart before it even gets a chance to get started. Sending someone back happens at the first meetup, holding the line happens at the second. If you don't know what's coming, and don't know that there's no failure possibility for the person you send back as long as they're loyal, its a really tough call, one many people get wrong.

[mopotter]

Captain_Obvious wrote...

I've only worked through a few pages of this discussion, but I gotta say I don't want any deaths on my squad.  I don't really have a hard time with the VS (I have a history of not liking Ash), but I lost Mordin on my first ME2 playthrough, and seeing that coffin was absolutely devastating to me.  I did everything I could to save everyone and still I lost him.  It didn't make me happy.  It didn't make me appreciate loss.  It didn't make me recognize that sometimes sacrifice is required.  I already know all of those things.  I get enough heartache and loss in real life. 

I don't care how important it is to the story to lose some team members.  I don't care how the emotional impact of that loss would make the story more meaningful, or the eventual victory that much more tangible.  The most meaningful part in ME2 for me was when everyone made it out alive.  That's what I want for ME3. 

With ME1, we got a good ending.  With ME2, we got a cliffhanger. For ME3, I want my fracking happy ending, dammit. 

Bioware, after five years and twenty-odd Shepards, don't you dare pull a Matrix on me. 

I also want one super we survied ending.  Not every ending, but one most definately.  I will also be very po'ed if there are no fireworks and dancing by the Hanar with this ending.:innocent:

[TheOptimist]

111987 wrote...]
I love his stories. But I don't think he was a good choice for being a team leader. He's probably the best soldier/fighter in the squad, but not the best leader. After all his only known leadership experience ended in him being betrayed and shot, and after that he worked as a solitary mercenary for several years...decades, wasn't it?

Hmm, my memory says he still lead teams of patchwork mercenaries, he just never formed an organization again. Do the job and leave. 

[mopotter]

TheZyzyva wrote...

Alright, well I've said everything I can think of. Thank you to everyone who has made an effort to understand the opinions of the other side. Obviously some people have been more stubborn than others, and I for one am glad that they aren't the ones writing the story.

Now I bid this thread good day.

Ahh, but we have 6 more months of boredom to go though before we can all start complaining about what is actually in the game.  

[Zu Long]

111987 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Blue Suns betrayed him and shot him in the head...

He was betrayed by his co-founder, who may have offered them more money and they are a bunch of unpleasant people who tried to kill Garrus.    He's not my favorite character but I found myself interested in some of his stories.

I love his stories. But I don't think he was a good choice for being a team leader. He's probably the best soldier/fighter in the squad, but not the best leader. After all his only known leadership experience ended in him being betrayed and shot, and after that he worked as a solitary mercenary for several years...decades, wasn't it?

Miranda's only known leadership experience ends with everyone on the station dead except Shepard and Jacob. Garrus's only known leadership experience ends with everyone in his group dead except Sidonis and himself.

None of them are exactly Shepard when it comes to getting people through missions alive, and it's easy to see how Zaeed could look like a good choice given the options presented.

It is interesting that for all three of them, the reason they failed was not enough loyalty. Tali's team is wiped out in the first mission for the same reason. Bioware is giving some strong hints.

[MatrixTheRenegade]

If they dabble in screwing around with you via potential LI deaths, they damn well better spend the bulk of ME3 reminding you you even have one, if you stuck by your ME1 choice. If you didn't choose Liara, I mean.

[Whatever42]

Some people don't want to be forced down the road into a bleak story. Some people insist on it because they like bleak stories but don't want to feel like they deliberately have to screw up to get it.

Fair enough. I think the trick may be to simply make it not only difficult to save everyone but make it have consequences.

Imagine the Zaeed loyalty mission where he died at the end of paragon path. Sure, he can live but it has consequences; you have to watch the workers burn. Imagine instead of Zaeed, this involves the VS. Imagine that for the VS to survive, a paragon Shep would have to make a renegade decision - perhaps sacrifice a squad of marines.

It would be especially interesting if it opened up additional dialogue for a paragon or renegade Shepard, that allowed some character development. It could involve some interesting interpersonal conflict with the VS.

Renegade sheps could make a similar choice. Would they forfeit a piece of technology that would advance human interests to save a squadmate?

Have these choices make a difference in the ending even. In other words, to beat this horse to death, real story and character impact > cheap theatrics.

The Virmire decision is still impactful, not because I care about Kaidan, I happily throw him into the jaws of death every time. It's because it's an impactful moment in Shepard's life and in the relationship between the VS and Shepard. Any deaths in ME3 should be equally impactful (without being a repeat of Virmire).

[mopotter]

crimzontearz wrote...

TheZyzyva wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

this is what happens when I have to go to sleep...Bam...4 pages missed.
*Walloftextpreventionsnip*

Yup.

Let me better explain what I would like to see, because I am not an any way an advocate of static, "this character will die" moments. Rather, I imagine a total, the-s***-has-just-hit-the-fan moment, Shep is struggling to keep up with everything around him, trying to keep everyone organized, but eventually it all breaks apart and depending on what orders you had been giving, someone has to make some sarcifice to keep the mission going. But it wouldn't just be some character swap of a scene, but rather whoever it ended up being would go out doing what they do best. For example, the same mission might end with Jack forced to hold back an explosion, or Grunt charging headlong into a mass of husks, or Tali staying behind to ensure the bomb goes off. Or there's a way to rescue them all but fail the mission and you have to deal with those consequences. It's not so much about choosing how imperfect it is but where the imperfections lie. It comes back to what I was saying about powerlessness, if I'm choosing to have people killed it won't be as dramatic. I want to be along for the ride as much as anyone else. Also there's the issue of how a chosen death would be handled, because if it's purely a gameplay death, there's no way the story won't become segmented by it. The character wouldn't get the conclusion intended for them. That's what was so wrong about the SM, letting people die didn't befit the story, didn't advance the plot, didn't deepen any characters. It was letting arcs get cut short with no discernable (as of yet) change to the main story. Basically, there needs to be a reason for me to just let someone die if it's avoidable. What changes if a character is dead, if anything? And more importantly to me, how will everyone else respond to it? One of the biggest reasons that I'm against being able to prevent the deaths is because Bioware did it so poorly on the SM. I know that being the last in the trilogy is a different animal though, and that's about all there is preventing me from just dreading watching how it plays out.

So no, I don't think I'm being hypocritical, I think you just misinterpreted what I said. The importance of the imperfections for a playthrough are not in a "how much" but a "where are they" perspective.

which all becomes moot point after the first run..or the first three.....after you know what happens and where...after you have been surprised the first few times by the "holy ****" moments and the deaths and so on and so forth......it becomes metagaming and crafiting the story the way you want it. Would it be better for you if the deaths were tied to decisions that are neither good nor bad? Would it make you feel better if the deaths were tied not to screw-ups (which often were not in ME2 either) but to seemingly un-related things so you can get yours "oh crap he just died" moments in your first run and then consciously choose what to make of your story?

just spitballing there

I know now I'm gonna be getting the Prima guide probably before ME3 comes out to make sure my first playthrough is the way I want it...but that's just me

I always get them, use them for any puzzles (I hate puzzles) and I like the pictures.   But I like all of my Shepards, some a bit more than others, so I'm not sure who will be my first play through.  Maybe the one whos LI has died in both games.  She has bad luck in love.  

[mopotter]

Virginian wrote...

I want the kind that makes me want to go back and start over from the very beginning (ME not the start of ME3) because I can't stand the idea of that person dying.

i could see that.  I would do that.  Actually if ME3 is good enough I will do it any way.

[TheOptimist]

AwesomeName wrote...

TheOptimist wrote...

AwesomeName wrote...
I'm not sure what your first 2 sentences here are referring to, but if you're talking about the substantive difference I see between a death I'm powerless to stop vs. a death which happens because I play poorly, I'm pretty sure the difference is self-implied.  The difference in emotional impact is something I'm not sure you'll ever understand, since it's been explained so many times now.

Replayability lessens the impact of death no matter which way it happens, choice or writer fiat.  And perhaps not, irrational need for depression has always been a bit inexplicable to me.

Huh?  That's an entirely seperate issue to what I'm even talking about.  I dunno, it seems to me you're still getting your wires crossed on this.  I wasn't talking about replayability.  But if you want to know my opinion on *that* issue, here's what I said earlier:

"I wasn't talking about how replay itself dimishes the emotional impact of a death, which it obviously does, regardless of how it happens."

That was what I responded to the first time, and you claimed it didn't make sense, but skip it. All I said was that for me there is zero difference between replays lessening the impact of an unavoidable death and replays blunting the impact when death can be avoided.

And no, I don't think I think too highly of myself, because I don't think I'm in the vast minority (minority, maybe, if most players play casually).  It's simply not true that if you use Jacob to escort your crew, it's simply luck if everyone survives.  I have played ME2 too many times now for that to be the case and no one EVER dies.  I always have Jacob escort the crew, I always have Garrus as the squad leader (who has far better experience as a LEADER than Zaeed or Miranda), I always have Legion/Kasumi/Tali in the tunnel, I always have Jack/Samara holding the biotic bubble, with the other by her side as a backup, I always get all the upgrades, I always ensure everyone is loyal by the time of the SM, and I always do the SM immediately after Legion's LM. 

Meh. If you hadn't downloaded Zaeed, it was very easy to pick Grunt or Garrus and take the other one with you. And gues what? You lose someone no matter what.  But again, I have no objection to making it more difficult in ME 3. Just not impossible.  And you ARE in the minority, the vast minority when including people who did not obsess over everything. 

With regards to everything else you've said - I disagree

See, we could have just started with this and saved 15 pages.

[crimzontearz]

I have only one Shepard, all my runs (all 20+ for each game) are NG+

[mopotter]

111987 wrote...

mopotter wrote...

111987 wrote...

The Blue Suns betrayed him and shot him in the head...

He was betrayed by his co-founder, who may have offered them more money and they are a bunch of unpleasant people who tried to kill Garrus.    He's not my favorite character but I found myself interested in some of his stories.

I love his stories. But I don't think he was a good choice for being a team leader. He's probably the best soldier/fighter in the squad, but not the best leader. After all his only known leadership experience ended in him being betrayed and shot, and after that he worked as a solitary mercenary for several years...decades, wasn't it?

 Not sure,  I know he was a Merc but he did some missions with others and some by himself.  I always like his story about the kid.  And I do agree, after the fact, that he wasn't a good choice becuase he died.   I also wanted to see if Joker was right, when he said Zaeed and Shepard are alike, except he takes money.  

[mopotter]

AwesomeName wrote...


You're kidding, right? Zaeed is obviously a bad choice, if you ever listen to his stories...  The guy obviously cares little for the safety of those under his command, hence so many people he's worked with have died.  Plus he's very obviously a jerk who no one on your ship is going to respect over someone like Garrus.

Funny that you mention Mordin and Tali because I've NEVER picked either of them to escort the crew back to the ship; in fact I've always picked Jacob to do the job because he was head of security at the Lazarus station, had some leadership skills, and he wasn't weak like Mordin or Tali.

And guess what?  I've never, ever, lost anyone.

I have enough games where Garrus is the leader, that eventually I want to see what happens with others.  Replay value.  

I've picked Tali, Thane, Jacob  take the crew back.  They all surved.

[habitat 67]

mopotter wrote...

Virginian wrote...

I want the kind that makes me want to go back and start over from the very beginning (ME not the start of ME3) because I can't stand the idea of that person dying.

i could see that.  I would do that.  Actually if ME3 is good enough I will do it any way.

I'd do it too.

[mopotter]

crimzontearz wrote...

I have only one Shepard, all my runs (all 20+ for each game) are NG+

all I can say is wow.  

 Using the same basic one for all of my games wouldn't work for me,  Part of my enjoyment is making new characters with new stories and new looks.  I don't really play to see how high a level I can make it to but that's pretty cool.

I have earthborn, colonist, space born, all of the different backgrounds possible all of the diferent classes and while they may look like cousins,  they are all different.
I have more Female Shepards, because I like playing a women.  One loved Kaidan but left him behind in ME1 and then met Thane who died in ME2; a couple who romanced Kaidan and he died, more than a couple who romanced Kaidan and he lived; one who romanced Liara, one who didn't romance anyone in ME1 but liked Jacob in ME2 and  a couple who didn't romance anyone in either games.  A male Sheaprd who romanced Ash; Mail Sheaprd who romanced Liara; one who romanced Jack and one who romanced Miranda.  
I have Shepards who lost people and I think two who made it though with everyone intact.  

[crimzontearz]

mopotter wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I have only one Shepard, all my runs (all 20+ for each game) are NG+

all I can say is wow.  

Using the same basic one for all of my games wouldn't work for me,  Part of my enjoyment is making new characters with new stories and new looks.  I don't really play to see how high a level I can make it to but that's pretty cool.
I have earthborn, colonist, space born, all of the different backgrounds possible all of the diferent classes and while they may look like cousins,  they are all different.
I have more Female Shepards, because I like playing a women.  One loved Kaidan but left him behind in ME1 and then met Thane who died in ME2; a couple who romanced Kaidan and he died, more than a couple who romanced Kaidan and he lived; one who romanced Liara, one who didn't romance anyone in ME1 but liked Jacob in ME2 and  a couple who didn't romance anyone in either games.  A male Sheaprd who romanced Ash; Mail Sheaprd who romanced Liara; one who romanced Jack and one who romanced Miranda.  
I have Shepards who lost people and I think two who made it though with everyone intact.  

Well....Etrius Shepard is my only Shepard. He is my Avatar in the ME universe and my vessel to experince the story each time I make a new playthrough. Any other Shepard even made by me would not work at all...he would not be MY Shepard. I have rationalized several paths through ME1 in several playthroughs and picked a "canon" one for import into ME2. In that particular one I saved Ash...romanced Liara, Spared Fist, Saved Wrex,stopped the scanning of the keepers and blah blah blah...but I had others that were entirely different. Same for ME2....and I'll pick a canon one for import in ME3

[JamieCOTC]

Chris Priestly wrote...

..So, in your opinions, what IS an "emotional death"? ..

Old Yeller

[Drone223]

I'm a paragon player but I don't want a "Happy ever after ending" with "Blue Children" etc the ending should be more about Shepard reflecting on what he/she lost in order to deafeat the Repears why, I know that Shepard will be losing a lot of close friends compared to the SM but still Shepard should show some satisfaction knowing that their deaths were not in vain

[Travie]

Aeris! (FFVII)

Now there is a videogame death that haunts many gamers to this day.

(Myself most definitely included)

[Rorschachinstein]

Drone223 wrote...

I'm a paragon player but I don't want a "Happy ever after ending" with "Blue Children" etc the ending should be more about Shepard reflecting on what he/she lost in order to deafeat the Repears why, I know that Shepard will be losing a lot of close friends compared to the SM but still Shepard should show some satisfaction knowing that their deaths were not in vain

You're insane. That's exactly the ending I do want.

I don't want another ending like this


I couldn't stop crying.

Modifié par Rorschachinstein, 03 septembre 2011 - 04:26 .

[Nyreen]

And they lived happily ever after...