56 réponses à ce sujet

[samb]

 This is one question I really want answered directly from the horses' mouthes.  Why were all the ME2 characters sidelined or killed?  I would l love if a dev or writer provided some insight as to why they just cheapened ME2 like that?

Was it because of storage?  Lack of support?  Deadlines?  
Bioware clearly cares about its story, as the Extended Cut has shown. But then why couldn't you show the same respect to ME2?

Anyone have any tweets or blog posts as to why?  I knew some PR lady did say something pointless (and rather mean) that the players shouldn't get too attatched to certain storylines but never elaborated on why. 

I don't hold out any hope that BW will salvage this with DLC, but I want an explanation. Even second hand comments would be great. 

Modifié par samb, 26 août 2012 - 03:15 .

[David7204]

Allow me to repost what I just wrote in another thread.

Time for some basic math. There are slightly less than 4096 different combinations of squadmates surviving and dying on the suicide mission (4083, I believe). If loyalty, Wrex's survival, and the VS are factored in, there are well over two million different combinations. The dialogue in ME 3 needs to work for every single one of them. Dialogue needs to be interdependent to be realistic. Bringing back a lot more squadmates would have made writing and coding dialogue absolutely impossible.

If it had been up to me, I would have brought back one squadmate from the ME 2 crew, in addition to Garrus and Tali. Maybe, maybe two. But probably not.

[samb]

@David: yeah I know what you mean about the combinations but your squad mates really don't factor a big part into the story. They are all replaceable. Wrex is replaced with Wreav, Liegon is replaced with a generic geth etc. All past decisions are railroaded or inconsequential. Give the collector base to TIM or destroy it? Doesn't matter. Choose Anderson over Udina? Doesn't matter, Udina is councilor anyway.
BW has made many choices and people just don't factor into the main plot. And if they did they are replaced or just trivialized.

Plus this is just your pet theory. Any BW staff say this in an interview or blog or tweet?

[David7204]

It's not a theory at all. It's math. It's facts. I do think your decisions didn't make a big enough impact, but there is no way they could have brought the entire crew back. The story needs to continue no matter what. We can't have entire story arcs just not happening because a character is dead. So I'm fine with the replacement characters. It's enough of an impact that your friend is dead.

Modifié par David7204, 26 août 2012 - 04:34 .

[corkey sweet]

because EA demanded the game be done in a certain time frame, and then poor decisions inbound

[David7204]

Gee, what a well thought out answer...

[samb]

David7204 wrote...

It's not a theory at all. It's math. It's facts. I do think your decisions didn't make a big enough impact, but there is no way they could have brought the entire crew back. The story needs to continue no matter what. We can't have entire story arcs just not happening because a character is dead. So I'm fine with the replacement characters. It's enough of an impact that your friend is dead.

But the math is pointless, because as you stated, the story will march on. All those varibles don't affect the story at all. Look at all the side missions involving your old crew. All of them will happen even if they didn't survive.  Having them rejoin the Normandy would only result in extra random dialogue with other crew members. 

I had that same theory as you but quickly dismissed it after seeing Javik was added with great impact to the main story as a DLC. To think preexisting character to get a lesser treatment should be realistic. Do you have any primary sources to back up your claim that it was a plot issue?  That is really the goal here. 

[samb]

corkey sweet wrote...

because EA demanded the game be done in a certain time frame, and then poor decisions inbound

Give me a quote from EA or BW that hints at this possibility. Naturally I don't expect either of them to explicitly say this but but any hints?

[spirosz]

Weren't loud enough or didn't intrigue them with the blow up dolls.

[David7204]

It isn't a plot issue. It's a technical issue. I don't need a source for this. It's just logic. Adding in "random squad dialogue" that correctly takes into account the death and survival of characters for over 4,000 possible situations is not trivial. It's an immense and completely impractical amount of work. Not only that, it isn't creative work. It's assembly line writing. It's taking a piece of dialogue and making sure it works for every situation, one by one. The more characters are involved, the more complex it becomes. Javik does not apply at all because he's alive no matter what.

Modifié par David7204, 26 août 2012 - 05:04 .

[samb]

David7204 wrote...

It isn't a plot issue. It's a technical issue. I don't need a source for this. It's just logic. Adding in "random squad dialogue" that correctly takes into account the death and survival of characters for over 4,000 possible situations is not trivial. It's an immense and completely impractical amount of work. Not only that, it isn't creative work. It's assembly line writing. It's taking a piece of dialogue and making sure it works for every situation, one by one. The more characters are involved, the more complex it becomes. Javik does not apply at all because he's alive no matter what.

Okay it's a technical issue. Then I'd like to hear a quote from the devs that can lend you theory some weight. It's not that I don't believe you but I need evidence. Just you saying "it's a fact" doesn't make it so. These are multimillion projects, with huge dev teams. Who am I to assume there limits?  
What you say MAYBE true but again please provide a primary source as evidence or it is just a (plausible) theory. 

[fainmaca]

David7204 wrote...

It isn't a plot issue. It's a technical issue. I don't need a source for this. It's just logic. Adding in "random squad dialogue" that correctly takes into account the death and survival of characters for over 4,000 possible situations is not trivial. It's an immense and completely impractical amount of work. Not only that, it isn't creative work. It's assembly line writing. It's taking a piece of dialogue and making sure it works for every situation, one by one. The more characters are involved, the more complex it becomes. Javik does not apply at all because he's alive no matter what.

I'll field this one. If you check out my fic, Into The Unknown, you'll see that it uses every Mass Effect 2 squadmate, along with the VS, Feron, and a few OCs. Now, when I write a segment, I'm writing with my canon Shepard in mind, a Paragon Jackmancer who got everyone out of ME2 alive, but I always take into account the potential for certain characters to not be there. I write a scene to be changeable, workable without a certain character alive. And you know what? It isn't that complicated, especially considering I'm one person with another full-time job and other responsibilities to deal with, as opposed to an entire team of developers who do this for a living.

You don't have to make huge mounds of content that locks up if a character lived or died. Look at what they did with Javik and Thessia. You got several more conversations, a couple of cutscenes, but its not like he opened up entire new wings of the temple or anything.

Take, as an example, what I did with the last mission I wrote for my fic. In this mission, Shepard travels to Batarian space. While there, he encounters a Batarian who Jack already knows. This opens up extra interaction for Jack that nobody else would bring to the table, but in no way does it affect whether the mission is crippled or not. Instead, the mission offers the opportunity to explore the character, instead of the other way around. If Jack is dead or left on the Normandy, this extra exposition about the character simply does not take place, and the mission proceeds as planned.

Now, you might say that that is fine for individual-Shepard interactions, but not for individual-individual interactions like they wanted to increase for ME3. But look again to my fic. Two of my new squadmates have deep interactions with ME2 squaddies (the female Turian has a budding romance with Garrus and the Male Quarian has a past with Jack), which build up both characters, but won't cripple them if absent due to past choices.

Like I said, I write this fic with as many possible permutations in mind as I can, including alive/dead, loyal/not loyal/ how did they reach that state, whether the squaddie was brought on the mission or not and so on and so on. I would argue with your statement that that isn't creative writing. You have to be creative to make a situation that doesn't require a very tight set of conditions to take place properly. You need to be creative to manage this without making it feel forced if a certain character isn't present.

It isn't the immense task so many seem to think it is. Sure, its a little more work intensive than sticking those characters on a bus for the rest of the story, but not so much so as to negate the value of the characters or the plots they move through.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

It isn't a plot issue. It's a technical issue. I don't need a source for this. It's just logic. Adding in "random squad dialogue" that correctly takes into account the death and survival of characters for over 4,000 possible situations is not trivial. It's an immense and completely impractical amount of work. Not only that, it isn't creative work. It's assembly line writing. It's taking a piece of dialogue and making sure it works for every situation, one by one. The more characters are involved, the more complex it becomes. Javik does not apply at all because he's alive no matter what.

You know Bioware isn't a 10-man indie team with a fridge budget, right?

[coldwetn0se]

Technical as it may be, I will never believe that all factors needed to be considered, nor was what already went into the game, considered for "every possibility".

Consider the following. DA2 has two DLC's that can be played AFTER the base game; Legacy and MotA. Both DLC's have material in them specific to Hawke's companions, but some companions could be dead, not recruited, run off, sold, told to **ss off (ya get the point). Now factor in your ability to take any of said available companions in the three (two in the case of MotA) slots alloted for companions to join your Hawke on the adventure. Next, realize that some of those companions have specific extra story content (example: Anders and Varric in Legacy), and all of the companions have banter. Finally, throw in LI material, and that is a lot of content, but they still managed it for a couple of DLC's. All that content is available whether you access it all or not (in other words, regardless of playing either DLC multiple times with different companions, that content was still included in the DLCs).

I am not trying to trivialize nor express that it is "easy" to make this stuff, but considering the serious lack of content for a number of Shepard's ME2 followers, I still believe they sidelined these characters waaay to much. Assuming that it cannot be done based on some 4000+ variables, is also assuming that all those variables NEED to be addressed. Besides, did you tally these variables from the plot flags listed in the games imports, for said characters? I would be very surprised if there are that many flags per ME2 squaddie, but then I haven't counted them.......

**EDIT**
typos

Modifié par coldwetn0se, 26 août 2012 - 05:37 .

[David7204]

12 characters, two options each. Survive or die = 2 ^ 12 = 4096 combinations.

If loyalty is considered, 3 options each. Survive and loyal, survive and disloyal, dead. 3 ^ 12 = ~ 500,000. Factor in two possibilities for Ashley or Kaidan surviving and two possibilities for Wrex surviving = ~ 2,000,000.

And as for Dragon Age, does the banter account for past decisions and outcomes? For example, if one character died or left, do other characters comment on it?

Modifié par David7204, 26 août 2012 - 05:44 .

[fainmaca]

David7204 wrote...

12 characters, two options each. Survive or die = 2 ^ 12 = 4096 combinations.

If loyalty is considered, 3 options each. Survive and loyal, survive and disloyal, dead. 3 ^ 12 = ~ 500,000. Factor in two possibilities for Ashley or Kaidan surviving and two possibilities for Wrex surviving = ~ 2,000,000.

And as for Dragon Age, does the banter account for past decisions and outcomes? For example, if one character died or left, do other characters comment on it?

One thing you seem to be blind to is that any single instance of the game does not need to take into account the two-odd million possibilities. You're throwing up all of these numbers, but ultimately they are meaningless. You will never get a single moment that takes into account more than a half dozen variables at any one time. The overall experience should take all of these variables into account, but that's why it's a 30-40 hour long experience.

Your statistics are meaningless.

[David7204]

Every one of those combinations needs to have at least some dialogue reflecting it. And every character should speak at least some of the time, preferably with other characters. So no, every instance of dialogue would not factor in those variables. But across the entire game, at least several of them would need to.

[fainmaca]

No. There will never be any moment in the game that would need to address every single variable. None at all.

Some moments will have the opportunities to address different sets of variables, but you don't need a sequence of dialogue to reflect/be unique to every one of your 2 million combinations. Its the composite whole that would reflect the combinations, not the nitty gritty moments.

In addition, you seem to be ignoring my earlier post where I point to something that demostrates how meaningless this 2 million figure you cling to is. It is not a technical nightmare to prepare for every possible Shepard/squad. I know that because I figured out how to do it by myself and have been doing it for the past year and a half.

[David7204]

The game would never have to address every single variable all at once, no. But it would have to address many different and overlapping 'clusters' of variables throughout.

And I can't really say anything about your story since I haven't read it.

[fainmaca]

Yes, but those would never unite into the tangled mess you seem to be trying to convince us that it would. Small variables contribute to medium-sized variables, which contribute to large variables, which contribute to plot variables, which ultimately shape the overall experience. You have a few keystone variables which holds together and takes the weight of the smaller ones. Ultimately it is doable, and without the strain you seem to expect.

I only point to my story to tell you that it is possible, and actually quite simple, if I'm honest. it makes the story feel more genuine to have these various possibilities visibly accounted for.

[coldwetn0se]

There are no banters (that I know of) in Legacy or MotA that reflect on the death/dismissal of any character. All characters were written for and voice acted for, regardless of the fact that they could be dead/gone, by the time you play the DLC (if you choose to play it after the base game is finished).

There is banter that can reflect on LI status, and in some cases which Act you play the DLC's in (quite prominent in MotA). For example in Legacy: if Fenris is your LI, but you have not gotten back together with him yet in Act 3, he will have a specific banter regarding the fact that he is glad that you "invited him to come along". It is reflective of the current "limbo" state of your romance with him.

In MotA, Tallis will reflect in dialogue with Hawke on whether the Qunari are still in the city or not, what you did during the Qunari uprising in Act. 2, AND whether you are "one worthy" (don't no how to spell the Qunari word used for this) as considered by the Arishok in Act 2 (if you followed certain paths).

Also, there is banter/content dialogue specific to your siblings that can change based on whether you have also brought along your LI...or not. Point being, that all of this content exists in the DLC whether you access it or not. And again I state; it really does depend on the flags that are marked for importation; this would have direct bearing from game to game based on your imports.

[David7204]

I disagree. I think you're severely underestimating these obstacles.

Look, if you're writing a simple conversation between two squadmembers to address a certain event, you'd have to write and code it a lot of different ways to make sure that every player with at least two surviving squadmembers hear it. If you don't do that, players with some dead squadmates wouldn't get any conversation, which is no good. And that's one two-person conversation, with no other factors to consider. So it might not be 4,000 possibilities all the time, but it would be a lot.

With 12 squadmates alive or dead, you'd have to write 66 different variations of the conversation, I believe, to make sure every player can hear it. Otherwise some players get screwed over. Then you'd have to code in priority to which two squadmembers discuss it depending on who is alive and who isn't.

Modifié par David7204, 26 août 2012 - 06:35 .

[Yuqi]

colon.

[samb]

David7204 wrote...

I disagree. I think you're severely underestimating these obstacles.

Look, if you're writing a simple conversation between two squadmembers to address a certain event, you'd have to write and code it a lot of different ways to make sure that every player with at least two surviving squadmembers hear it. If you don't do that, players with some dead squadmates wouldn't get any conversation, which is no good. And that's one two-person conversation, with no other factors to consider. So it might not be 4,000 possibilities all the time, but it would be a lot.

With 12 squadmates alive or dead, you'd have to write 66 different variations of the conversation, I believe, to make sure every player can hear it. Otherwise some players get screwed over. Then you'd have to code in priority to which two squadmembers discuss it depending on who is alive and who isn't.

I think you are overestimating its complexity. Think about most of the random conversations that you overhear, especially between crew mates. You Garrus and James talking about war stories, EDI and Joker analyzing the ins and outs of a racist joke, Javik and Garrus in the lounge talking about the reapers, a drunk Tali telling Javik she knows he is really fond of the crew. All of it is non consequential. It is almost never about a certein event. And I feel that is deliberate in order to avoid what you are talking about. 

[LanceSolous13]

The "they could be dead" thing is BS.

Mordin is one of the easiest people to die in the Suicide Mission and look at his ME3 role.

Legion has a huge role in ME3.

Garrus and Tali are squaddies.

"They could be dead" doesn't hold water.