4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Does keeping six or seven specific people alive invalidate the billions that have perished?

People usually won't care when random civilian npcs die.

And yes, it does. The fact that it is possible is bad. Against an opposing force like this, no matter how good your choices and preformance are, you will take hits.

[CroGamer002]

I want to be able to save everyone in my squad, though make it very hard.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Lizardviking wrote...
People usually won't care when random civilian npcs die.

This. Usually civilian NPCs are running about just to get killed in a way that will make you say "whoa, that was cool".

[AdmiralCheez]

Lizardviking wrote...

People usually won't care when random civilian npcs die.

You'll care when you walk into a ruined city and all the refugees are cradling their dead and staring at you like it's your fault.

And yes, it does. The fact that it is possible is bad. Against an opposing force like this, no matter how good your choices and preformance are, you will take hits.

Did you read the whole OP where I explained that I enjoyed it precisely because it's unrealistic?

[Undertone]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Undertone wrote...

I also don't want to play like a retard to lose people.

So would you be okay with a zero squad death ending if it were basically impossible to achieve without an incredible attention to detail and sacrifices made in other areas?

To me it would be sort of cheap, unrealistic and make the Reapers look like a joke. But that's my personal view while I realize the majority of this forum are well too idealistic for my taste at points. If I were to consider such ending however it should be nearly impossible - and certainly through a mixture of renegade and paragon choices. No extreme player (as in extreme in alignment) should be abe to get it. But then you know what the problem would be - it will become sort of the "cannon" way to play. You do this and that to get the best result. Perhaps the only good thing that would come from it is that it would make people less one-dimensional and more open to the renegade way, which is continiously shoved by Bioware and presented as the wrong choice but don't let me turn this thread into renegade/paragon debate. 

[Collider]

For the most part I don't trust Bioware to do squad mate deaths right.
Virmire was okay, but Shepard magically forgot he was involved with the romanced Ashley/Kaidan if they were virmired. There was also the fact of having potentially 3 other squad mates who could have helped save both Ashley/Kaidan.

My biggest opposition to forced squad mate deaths is the tendency for Bioware games (as I see it) to basically forget about the whole thing shortly after the death. There may be one conversation about it, but other than that, nothing. Rendering the whole thing almost entirely hollow and meaningless.

Also, many people have absolutely terrible ideas for squad mate deaths, like squad mates dying randomly, your LI dying invariably, save your LI or a planet, give ME3 a Tali-Garrus virmire.

Allow squad mate deaths, but don't force it unless it's done well, which it probably wouldn't.

[Undead Han]

What weird, childish fantasies has Mass fulfilled for you, if any?  Do you think happy endings and No One Left Behinds belong in a game like ME3?  If not, why?  Would you accept that sort of thing if it was optional/difficult to achieve?  How do you want to feel when the credits roll?

Seeing as this is the final chapter of the story and the one in which the war finally begins, I think there should be some death and destruction, and Shepard and his squad shouldn't be immune from it. The story needs to have some emotional heft, and I don't think the writers are going to achieve that if Shepard and his squard are invulnerable.

[Undertone]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Undertone wrote...

To have everyone from your crew survive is absolutely immersion braking and will make the Reaper invasion like a joke.

Shepard came back from the dead.  There is a race of beautiful blue pansexual babes.

What immersion?

Shep came from the dead indeed, facepalm worthy moment but you know my opinion on how ME2 is inferior to ME1. What immersion? Please you know what I'm talking about. Every game has a line that can cross and a limitation where it just becomes a joke. 

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

To me it would be sort of cheap, unrealistic and make the Reapers look like a joke. But that's my personal view while I realize the majority of this forum are well too idealistic for my taste at points. If I were to consider such ending however it should be nearly impossible - and certainly through a mixture of renegade and paragon choices. No extreme player (as in extreme in alignment) should be abe to get it. But then you know what the problem would be - it will become sort of the "cannon" way to play. You do this and that to get the best result. Perhaps the only good thing that would come from it is that it would make people less one-dimensional and more open to the renegade way, which is continiously shoved by Bioware and presented as the wrong choice but don't let me turn this thread into renegade/paragon debate.

Canon.  One N.  It's the difference between established lore and heavy artillery.

But you see, the problem with your argument is this: Most people don't game as obsessively as we do.  They don't consider every single variable or consult the Ultimate SM Guide to get the ending they want.  The average player just goes with her gut and only plays the game once.

We're the kooky ones that come back to putz with it again.

And I still fail to see how coming to the rescue of half a dozen specific individuals somehow lessens the gravity of the situation.

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

Shep came from the dead indeed, facepalm worthy moment but you know my opinion on how ME2 is inferior to ME1. What immersion? Please you know what I'm talking about. Every game has a line that can cross and a limitation where it just becomes a joke.

To be fair, the asari set the bar pretty damn low.

[Collider]

Don't forget Kasumi's magical ninja jumping ability.
And the asari are bad, yes.

[Bekkael]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

OVER TO YOU, MY LOVELIES: What weird, childish fantasies has Mass fulfilled for you, if any?

All of them. They allow me to live out my White Knight Syndrome in a harmless way that affects no one other than myself; to be the hero that sweeps my LI off their feet or let him sweep me off mine, and finally, it lets me have a do-over when I screw something up. Choice X was a bad idea? Whoops! *Reload*

They also allow me the flip side: to be a selfish demon to pixels when I'm really in the mood to flip off my neighbor. I can just go punch the reporter instead. That's cathartic and socially positive. I wonder if RPing games couldn't be used as a form of treatment or therapy for the socially frustrated individual.

Do you think happy endings and No One Left Behinds belong in a game like ME3?

Yes. TBH, there's no reason to play otherwise. If I'm going to be a tragic, failed individual that ultimately gets beaten, I'll just toddle on back to real life with its endless experiences of pouring lemon juice in multiple paper cuts. The entire point of fantasy is pleasure and temporary escape. You only need enough realism to ensure immersion. If my fantasy experience hurts me too much, then it ceases to be enjoyable.

How do you want to feel when the credits roll?

Similar to post-coital afterglow...exhausted yet satisfied.

[Undead Han]

The Kasumi cutscenes were terrible.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
Shepard came back from the dead.  There is a race of beautiful blue pansexual babes.

What immersion?

You can have me believe the scientificly impossible, in FTL, in blue space babes, in resurection technology. If done well.

But don't make me buy a BS excuse like a guy managing to crack a safe code with 10x10x10x10x10 combinations in his first try without any kind of hint or clue. Or a man just happening to find a remote control right beside him, which in turn just happens to be able to stop space-time-continium, which in turn allows him to save the girl and beat the bad guy.

[Dave of Canada]

While you're looking to feel good, I'm looking for sacrifices that make Shepard reflect on the personal and the greater good. Does Shepard sacrifice what he holds dear to protect the others? How far would Shepard go before he won't cross that line?

Everybody is dying, why does Shepard's bubble suddenly grant them immunity? I'm not saying kill companions left and right, just create scenes where people who want their "happy ending" realize it isn't as happy as that.

You want to save Vega and Wrex who're trapped on Tuchanka while it's being orbitally bombarded by Reapers by sending in your unprepared fleet? Fine, do so. Save everybody you want, just realize it should cost you something. Mass Effect 3 is a war story, not a walk in the park. People in positions of power have to make decisions, ugly as they are, between the personal and the greater good.

Reaching the ending of the game where Shepard saves the entire galaxy without any species or homeworld destroyed, his friends are perfectly fine, galactic harmony is formed and Shepard lives off happily ever after would just butcher Mass Effect 3 for me.

[Undertone]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Undertone wrote...

To me it would be sort of cheap, unrealistic and make the Reapers look like a joke. But that's my personal view while I realize the majority of this forum are well too idealistic for my taste at points. If I were to consider such ending however it should be nearly impossible - and certainly through a mixture of renegade and paragon choices. No extreme player (as in extreme in alignment) should be abe to get it. But then you know what the problem would be - it will become sort of the "cannon" way to play. You do this and that to get the best result. Perhaps the only good thing that would come from it is that it would make people less one-dimensional and more open to the renegade way, which is continiously shoved by Bioware and presented as the wrong choice but don't let me turn this thread into renegade/paragon debate.

Canon.  One N.  It's the difference between established lore and heavy artillery.

But you see, the problem with your argument is this: Most people don't game as obsessively as we do.  They don't consider every single variable or consult the Ultimate SM Guide to get the ending they want.  The average player just goes with her gut and only plays the game once.

We're the kooky ones that come back to putz with it again.

And I still fail to see how coming to the rescue of half a dozen specific individuals somehow lessens the gravity of the situation.

The main problem for me is why should I lessen myself and purposefully do worse in order to create drama? By default people are completionist (the majority of people). I didn't go SM until I had all the upgrades because well that's just the logical thing to do. Another problem is that Shep is not a god and can't have control over the entire battleground or everything that happens. 

Imagine a better presented Virmire - squad A is sent to destroy some sort of planetary shield so the main force can engage the Reaper army. They do succeed in the mission but in the process get overwhelmed. Shepard cannot go to the rescue or send reinforcements because such action might cost the entire battlefield only to save 3 people. This kind of things happen all the time.  

[AdmiralCheez]

Lizardviking wrote...

You can have me believe the scientificly impossible, in FTL, in blue space babes, in resurection technology. If done well.

But don't make me buy a BS excuse like a guy managing to crack a safe code with 10x10x10x10x10 combinations in his first try without any kind of hint or clue. Or a man just happening to find a remote control right beside him, which in turn just happens to be able to stop space-time-continium, which in turn allows him to save the girl and beat the bad guy.

I don't get the analogy.

Look, I know you prefer a realistic ending, but what's the point in having more than one if they all suck?  Do you honestly think Bioware should cut in on someone else's enjoyment just because the very existence of that enjoyment does bad things to your immersion?  You probably won't even know about it until you mosey on into the forums after you've done your first run.

[AdmiralCheez]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Reaching the ending of the game where Shepard saves the entire galaxy without any species or homeworld destroyed, his friends are perfectly fine, galactic harmony is formed and Shepard lives off happily ever after would just butcher Mass Effect 3 for me.

You are blowing my argument way the hell out of proportion, dude.

[diamondedge]

Shepard came back from the dead.  There is a race of beautiful blue pansexual babes.

What immersion?

I see what you did there.

Anyway, I'd be outright mad if I couldn't get my "happily ever after" achivements. On my first play I invested over 40 hours making sure I didn't miss anything, got all possible upgrades, ****d countless worlds to death for minerals which was gruelsome beyond description, searching stores, talking to my squadmates even if I didn't really want to... I was nice and made sure everyone had their mind on the mission (awesome hints on the back cover of the game ) for one reason to make sure I can get them as many as possible alive.

I've been given a choice. Should I do everthing right - my crew will live and there is nothing I hate more than watching someone's back the entire time only to have them die in some scripted sequence I have no effect on!
I want to be able to save all my people, because as you've so wonderfully pointed out - it's something I can't do in real life and becasue there are enough things going wrong in the game. Bioware did wonderful job making me care about each and every one of them - from Dr. Chakwas to Kenneth and Gaby.

Sure, the outcome is not realistic - but OMFG - Mass Effect is science fiction video game. Whoever is playing this game for realism ... Well.

[jeweledleah]

I don't think Cheez or any one of us are advocating saccarine sweet ending with zero losses. even in ME2 - there were losses. I think we're fine with having to sacrifice in some ways. and no one expecting victimless war (I mean, even in a freaking trailer - millions dead in just one week) there are losses.

here's an example of a personal sacrifice I would find acceptable. DAO - dark ritual. you want to survive? create a demon baby. or ask your boyfriend to create a demon baby - either way. it might not be a perfect sunshine of an option, but its an option. all we ask for is an option.

[Enmystic]

I agree with Cheez.  She has summed things up in words that I am not able to.  I play video games for escapism. 

[ Do you think happy endings and No One Left Behinds belong in a game
like ME3?

 
Yes, if they are done right.  I don't want to have every victory handed to me, but at the same time I don't want every ending and every possibility to be an absolute downer.  I want to earn that happy ending whatever it's going to be.

Would you accept that sort of thing if it was
optional/difficult to achieve?

I don't mind if I have to fight a bit harder to get that happy ending.  I just want to be able to have it.  At the very least I want to keep my love interest.  If I can save the entire squad I'll do that too.

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well this is why Star Wars* kicks arse - because the little guy ends up beating the odds and kicking the powerful bad guy square in the bawls - in space.

Mass Effect shamelessly feeds into this fantasy so many of us have. I happily engage in it. I need this outlet. I want to be the hero who takes the high road even when it gets tough. I want to save my friends. I want to save the universe. I want to be a really nice guy and help people. I want to shoot things with lasers. I want to travel faster than light. I want to have Vulcan mind-meld sex.

I want to be a space cowboy.

Thanks Bioware for making it happen.

*All Almostfaceman posts mentioning Star Wars automatically and effortlessly do not include the Prequels. Patent pending.

Reading this made my night.  Awesome.
*goes back to lurking*

Modifié par Enmystic, 07 octobre 2011 - 06:55 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Undertone wrote...

The main problem for me is why should I lessen myself and purposefully do worse in order to create drama?

And why should I have to waste time and mine for minerals just to create the ending I want?

[Dave of Canada]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Look, I know you prefer a realistic ending, but what's the point in having more than one if they all suck?

Because people prefer various degrees of "suck". They might enjoy that we've defeated the Reapers and humanity is rebuilding to a new feature, they might enjoy that humanity is screwed in face of the Turians knocking them while they're down, they might enjoy that the galaxy has united and is trying to rebuild despite the destruction of Thessia / Earth / Palaven.

What's the point of having other endings if you have one where you "win" on all fronts other than if you want to be intentionally stupid on your playthrough or if you want to see how it's like to fail? There's no point.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 07 octobre 2011 - 06:56 .