428 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...
The problem with random is people will just reload to make it pick someone else they do not like.

That would only work if hte death variable is generated right before the mission (or during it).
But what if it's generated at game start?

It would still be scripted so would be kind of pointless. Russian roulette is not appealing. As I stated, the story would be stronger and have more cohesion if they built specific deaths into the story. Yeah BW may play favorites but every character is someone's favorite. If they were going for impact the character that is the most popular should be axed.

Why exactly would it be pointless?

It would be the same death but just a different victim. The story would not be as tailored because you'd have a death that could happen to anyone so it would be a more generic experience. They are not going to make an excellent death story for all 12+ characters it could happen to.

I still fail to see how that makes it pointless. Why exactly should every squad member die in a completely different and unique way?

I also fail to see why it would only be 1 death scenario?


Maybe 1 of them gets crushed by a collapsing building. Or 3 of them die in the collapse. Or maybe a rocket to the face? A sniper buller? Reaper beam cannon?

I really dont' see any difference...

[Lotion Soronarr]

Dilandau3000 wrote...
I think that if Garrus is to die, it should happen like this: he shoots at an enemy, misses, then is killed by that enemy, and his last words are "if only I had better calibrated my gun..."

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[FlyinElk212]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

There is only one argument against squadmate death - and it can be summed up as "do not want!".

Even so, that in itself is a pretty compelling argument, as, you know...we're the audience and consumer base for Bioware.

That said, this IS the last game of the trilogy. It's not like we can be like, "OMGZ THEY KILLED GARRUS?! I'm DEFINITELY not buying Mass Effect 4 now!"

[Destroy Raiden_]

The way we could save everyone in 2 was very unrealistic after I finally saved everyone it was like that sucked I thought it would feel pretty good to save everyone on the crew no it felt better having lost 1 - 2 people in various playthroughs by accident. If I outright killed Mirada because I hated her that would be just as hollow and bad as me keeping everyone alive through a SM. If say I made all the logical choices during the mission why couldn't some one randomly die fleeing to the ship? Or say I tell them do this and they go over comms, " Nope I can't too much resistance I'm going to do this instead," you say, "no," and they still go for it and one of their crew dies.

Sure players could learn who dies on team like the second choice character for team 2 always dies so I'll put so and so I don't like in it and they'll be gone they could do that the system won't stop that but that's them. I'd like for some random deaths if they can be done in a plausible fashion a character taking a gamble that is logical for the character like for instance Jack taking a bullet for Miranda and dying is not logical for Jack, Jack hates Miranda so in that scene Miranda dies because Jack either A) didn't see the shooter approaching or allowed Miranda to get shot if it was B she's got some explaining to do if it's A its bad luck for everyone. But say you had Jacob in the team at that moment instead he will save Miranda and die because he has a connection with her.

I also don't want to be qued into something will happen here I want to be totally blind sided like I was when shep got hacked I thought we'd encounter an army as usual he got hacked instead and used like a puppet for David's own goal that was great I'd like more blind sideing but if its tied to character deaths or reactions I want it to be appropriate for whom is in your part if curtain characters go with shep thing A will happen if others go its thing B if you mix them its C. Sometimes its unavoidable how it will turn out for instance shep will always be hacked in Overlord but maybe after he is let go and is dealing with Archer the event can change shep hits Archer and Garrus will kick him if in party but Tali won't she'll watch the guy fall down and say he deserved it.

[Heather Cline]

I'm not a fan of forced squadmates death's. In ME1 it felt forced. In ME2 if you played badly it felt forced. Unless there is a good plot reason for them to die, I see no reason to have your squadmates dying left and right. Yes it's a galactic war, but unless there is a good plot reason in the story for them to die. Like say saving an entire race of people while you and the rest of the crew evacuate said people, there is no reason to kill them off. It just annoys me that killing off someone just to make someone feel sad is stupid.

[Lotion Soronarr]

FlyinElk212 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

There is only one argument against squadmate death - and it can be summed up as "do not want!".

Even so, that in itself is a pretty compelling argument, as, you know...we're the audience and consumer base for Bioware.

That said, this IS the last game of the trilogy. It's not like we can be like, "OMGZ THEY KILLED GARRUS?! I'm DEFINITELY not buying Mass Effect 4 now!"

And what am I? Don't I count?

Its not a compellign argument if there's plenty of audience that sez "Do want!"

[Lotion Soronarr]

Heather Cline wrote...

I'm not a fan of forced squadmates death's. In ME1 it felt forced. In ME2 if you played badly it felt forced. Unless there is a good plot reason for them to die, I see no reason to have your squadmates dying left and right. Yes it's a galactic war, but unless there is a good plot reason in the story for them to die. Like say saving an entire race of people while you and the rest of the crew evacuate said people, there is no reason to kill them off. It just annoys me that killing off someone just to make someone feel sad is stupid.

Why the "just"?
How would you know it's the only reason? And why is that a bad reason?

[InvincibleHero]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
I still fail to see how that makes it pointless. Why exactly should every squad member die in a completely different and unique way?

I also fail to see why it would only be 1 death scenario?


Maybe 1 of them gets crushed by a collapsing building. Or 3 of them die in the collapse. Or maybe a rocket to the face? A sniper buller? Reaper beam cannon?

I really dont' see any difference...

I am sure you are familiar with BW by now. VS being called carbon copies. They will do as little work as possible. So it will just be one plug in who dies scenario with less care put into it than if they decided Thane dies and an iconic way to do it. Does it matter who dies if it always happens say by a bullet on x mission? It changes no future playthroughs as the argument against fixed deaths. It fixes nothing even going against that strawman argument as for the need of randomization. There is no uniqueness and any dialog would be genralized as well.

They are not going to make that many possible death scenarios for random deaths. If three are to die then three that are static will be what we get whether they are random or scripted. The scripted are far more likely to be better because they have something stable to work from. They can have everyone mention I am sorry Thane died or you can speak about Thane with ceratin characters. If all can die you can bet that is gone. They will have generic responses because all that extra dialog and voice over will be required and much would be superfluous in any single playthrough. Not going to happen.

[Eclipse_9990]

AwesomeName wrote...

I think we should have squad deaths even if we play well...

No, no. I vehemently disagree with this notion. If I do something stupid(which I won't) then I can accept some squaddies being killed, but if I do my best, and it still happens? No no no no no. 

I like my squad mates alot, and I would be pretty damn upset if they went, and died on me.. Except maybe Miranda, but even still I wouldn't be happy.

Modifié par Eclipse_9990, 02 décembre 2011 - 03:44 .

[Omega4RelayResident]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sometimes your best just isn't good enough.

I have to ask... Saphra did you have a disappointing childhood in a slum?... You are so pessimistic it makes me wonder.

[GMagnum]

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sometimes your best just isn't good enough.

I have to ask... Saphra did you have a disappointing childhood in a slum?... You are so pessimistic it makes me wonder.

omg hella rude tbh

[GMagnum]

lightsnow13 wrote...

GMagnum wrote...

Omega4RelayResident wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Sometimes your best just isn't good enough.

I have to ask... Saphra did you have a disappointing childhood in a slum?... You are so pessimistic it makes me wonder.

omg hella rude tbh

gmag are you gay? can we be lovers?

aye i aint gay but we cn be homies tbh

[GMagnum]

ayeeeeeeeeeeee ayeeeeeeeeee dat cool tbh cuz me n my homie on da blok gon be playin it 2 on xbox n we got sum bsn homies comin ovr 2 so u can com 2 tbh