KingDan97 wrote...
Again I ask, why do i need to choose? Why does this need to be a kobiyashi maru? Why can't I have it all?GreenDragon37 wrote...
Mr. MannlyMan wrote...
So, basically, the best solution would be:
Everybody can live, but it shouldn't result from the player's decision to do everything and, therefore, save everyone as much as it should be based on a moral and/or meaningful choice. Something that strengthens a common theme in the series, like sacrifice and the bonds of friendship. For example, leaving innocents to die so that the people close to you may live (that's an extreme, but you see what I'm getting at).
I, too, thought that saving everyone on the team in ME2 was more or less a cakewalk, and the SM was meaningless to me because there were very few meaningful decisions involved with keeping your squad alive. Once you had made all of the preparations (which the game itself kept reminding you to do beforehand), you were asked to make some very obvious leadership decisions to make your team as efficient as possible, and that was about it.
My hope is that there are forced crises, not deaths, which will FORCE the player to choose between his squadmates and his mission. Maybe Shepard stretches his crew thin by ordering them to find and evac all civilians in the near vicinity while he goes off to kick some ass? Maybe he chooses to rescue Garrus or Ashley from a husk swarm rather than go after an important diplomat? Stuff that reminds me of the "Distress Call" Trailer from the ME1 days; that's what I'd like to see more of. Of course, it'd only be fair if the number of crises you have to deal with in ME3 was reduced by making certain decisions in the past...
I approve of this. I like the idea of choosing between your squad and your mission. "Sure, you can save your squadmate... if you want to be a selfish douche and leave 100 civilians to die at the hands of the Reapers." Those kinds of things. It's not the Reaper War if you don't sacrifice something in order to win.
I even agree, that the SM was too easy, but why does that mean that there HAS to be losses? Does it need to even out, because the fact that some needed to survive then means that some need to die now? What if I like everyone in my squad, but also like the cultural diversity that comes with having such a rich diversity of races in the galaxy, am I just SoL?
Don't give me the line of "Oh well sometimes bad things just happen." because in a game nothing JUST happens, it's all coded and predetermined there's no random element, it's Chaos Theory at it's fundament, patterns within seeming randomness. We're not talking about pulling a Johnson here, a meaningful scripted death, we're saying that someone dies just to have death. I'm okay with a character dying for his or her uniquely established principles, but what's being suggested here is just "Oh sorry lol I'm the grim reaper, pick someone to die now k thnx bye. You need to tbh."
Let me work for it, double my game length, make me use the stupid scanning mechanic to find every stupid obnoxious N7 mission in the game, make me play through every single multiplayer scenario and reach 100% galactic readiness, but don't make it so that I have to suffer losses just because you feel unfulfilled by a happy ending.
So, you're saying in the entire Reaper conflict, no losses should be sustained what-so-ever, and we should have complete control of everything? You couldn't save all of the colonists on Horizon, you couldn't kill Vito and save those factory workers, you couldn't save the entie colony in the N7: Javelin(sp?) missions, and you couldn't save the Batarian Colony from the Reapers because Shep is not god. He can't do everything at once, he's still human. It wouldn't make sense to split your team up to save colonists in the midst of a Reaper invasion, and when something goes awry everything turns out perfect.
You people want choice, but you don't want consequences. That should be what an RPG is about. Making decisisons and living with the consquences. You can't save everyone and everything, especially not now. You can only mitigate the losses. That should be the best possible scenario, not "super-sunshine and rainbows". You should have the possibility for allowing all of your squad to live, but it should come at a price. Loss of a Prothean Artifact that can help out in the Reaper invasion, loss of tactical advantage, loss of civilian lives, etc.
And this shouldn't be limited to squads. It should be like the ME1 trailer when Noveria was under attack, and Shep had to make a difficult decision and decided that the planet was already lost and set a new course. That's what needs to be in the Reaper War. Hard choices.
Modifié par GreenDragon37, 28 novembre 2011 - 04:25 .
Retour en haut
