303 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Time to lay the hammer down...

ME1 and ME2 did it WRONG...ME3 did it RIGHT

ME1 characters didn't really develop outside of Wrex, this is because Drew K sucks at character development outside really the villian and the dueteragonist.

ME2's characters developed far better, however, they lived in their own bubble and had minimal plot participation outside Miranda, Kacob, and at first Tali. Characters lacked relationships with eachother outisde two flare ups.

ME3 did it right...the characters (and I consider Cortez, Traynor, and Joker as non combat squaddies) not only develop throughout the game, but play roles in the plot, even develop by it.

Nevermind that ME1 and ME2 reeks of identical dialogue, ME1 more than ME2......Hell if Garrus is with Ashley on the finale of ME1, he would argue saving the council, if he was with Liara he would take the pro-human position. In ME3, the squaddies all bring their own personalities to the mission without the clone dialogue, bringing new insights to the mission. You can also see exclusive scenes such as kicking the ocnsole with James on Rannoch, or Javik bringing a whole layer to the Thessia mission.

[BizkitRebellion]

txgoldrush wrote...

Time to lay the hammer down...

ME1 and ME2 did it WRONG...ME3 did it RIGHT

ME1 characters didn't really develop outside of Wrex, this is because Drew K sucks at character development outside really the villian and the dueteragonist.

ME2's characters developed far better, however, they lived in their own bubble and had minimal plot participation outside Miranda, Kacob, and at first Tali. Characters lacked relationships with eachother outisde two flare ups.

ME3 did it right...the characters (and I consider Cortez, Traynor, and Joker as non combat squaddies) not only develop throughout the game, but play roles in the plot, even develop by it.

Nevermind that ME1 and ME2 reeks of identical dialogue, ME1 more than ME2......Hell if Garrus is with Ashley on the finale of ME1, he would argue saving the council, if he was with Liara he would take the pro-human position. In ME3, the squaddies all bring their own personalities to the mission without the clone dialogue, bringing new insights to the mission. You can also see exclusive scenes such as kicking the ocnsole with James on Rannoch, or Javik bringing a whole layer to the Thessia mission.

This.

[txgoldrush]

Nerevar-as wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

Yate wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

I wouldn't say that the ME3 squad is the reason for reduced replay value. In fact, it wasn't all that bad - Javik was interesting. EDI was not bad (except her new body was a little "extreme"). Main problem is that a lot of the ME2 characters got shoved under the rug and most of them were interesting enough not to warrant such treatment.

ME3 had many issues (imho) and this is but one of them. Not the main reason but definitely part of it.

yeah yeah, just like when ME2 came out and all you people wanted was the old squad

same old same old

If you paint everyone with the same brush you might as well paint yourself with it. I like the ME2 squad better than the ME1 squad. A walking codex, a whiny ex-cop, a nihilistic merc, a horny-but-shy scientist, and the two complementary human LIs. Please

B*tching about b*tching is counter-productive. 

Vs a psychopath, a savage, a thug, a fangirl, a murderer, a lawful stupid huntress, a thief with severe mourning issues, a whiny design baby, a vigilante, an utterly boring guy, a cold genius and another fanboy. So yeah, you are kind of right.

And what we wanted was a better treatment of ME1 LIs. They went through severe derailment which ended up bringing nothing in ME3. The VI didn´t even get a DLC to fix issues.

At least the ME2 cast were more than just talking codex entries.

Wrong again, Ashley went through character development where she learns to trust Shepard...in fact the scene on Chronos where Shepard doubts himself while Ashley tries to tell him she believes in him was a far cry from her appearance on Mars. ME3 did character development best.

[CynicalShep]

Nerevar-as wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

Yate wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

I wouldn't say that the ME3 squad is the reason for reduced replay value. In fact, it wasn't all that bad - Javik was interesting. EDI was not bad (except her new body was a little "extreme"). Main problem is that a lot of the ME2 characters got shoved under the rug and most of them were interesting enough not to warrant such treatment.

ME3 had many issues (imho) and this is but one of them. Not the main reason but definitely part of it.

yeah yeah, just like when ME2 came out and all you people wanted was the old squad

same old same old

If you paint everyone with the same brush you might as well paint yourself with it. I like the ME2 squad better than the ME1 squad. A walking codex, a whiny ex-cop, a nihilistic merc, a horny-but-shy scientist, and the two complementary human LIs. Please

B*tching about b*tching is counter-productive. 

Vs a psychopath, a savage, a thug, a fangirl, a murderer, a lawful stupid huntress, a thief with severe mourning issues, a whiny design baby, a vigilante, an utterly boring guy, a cold genius and another fanboy. So yeah, you are kind of right.

And what we wanted was a better treatment of ME1 LIs. They went through severe derailment which ended up bringing nothing in ME3. The VI didn´t even get a DLC to fix issues.

Romance was pretty messed up all around. I'd actually say that everybody except Liara and Garrus could use a little polishing (or a complete rewrite). And ME2 characters were better portrayed than ME1, by a long shot. LMs were a pretty good addition, too (imo). With Jack , Miranda, Mordin and Samara you get to peal the layers of their "tough and uncompromising" to see the real people behind that facade. Legion gives you a great inishight into synthetics, Garrus still whines a lot but this time he at least has a legitimate reason to do so. The only negatives are the butchering of the VS and Jacob who is just dull.

Modifié par CynicalShep, 18 février 2013 - 09:03 .

[spirosz]

txgoldrush wrote...

In ME3, the squaddies all bring their own personalities to the mission without the clone dialogue, bringing new insights to the mission. You can also see exclusive scenes such as kicking the ocnsole with James on Rannoch, or Javik bringing a whole layer to the Thessia mission.

That's great and all, but I'd rather of heard this stuff from other squadmates, compared to what we had in ME3. 

[darthnick427]

txgoldrush wrote...

Time to lay the hammer down...

ME1 and ME2 did it WRONG...ME3 did it RIGHT

ME1 characters didn't really develop outside of Wrex, this is because Drew K sucks at character development outside really the villian and the dueteragonist.

ME2's characters developed far better, however, they lived in their own bubble and had minimal plot participation outside Miranda, Kacob, and at first Tali. Characters lacked relationships with eachother outisde two flare ups.

ME3 did it right...the characters (and I consider Cortez, Traynor, and Joker as non combat squaddies) not only develop throughout the game, but play roles in the plot, even develop by it.

Nevermind that ME1 and ME2 reeks of identical dialogue, ME1 more than ME2......Hell if Garrus is with Ashley on the finale of ME1, he would argue saving the council, if he was with Liara he would take the pro-human position. In ME3, the squaddies all bring their own personalities to the mission without the clone dialogue, bringing new insights to the mission. You can also see exclusive scenes such as kicking the ocnsole with James on Rannoch, or Javik bringing a whole layer to the Thessia mission.

Gotta agree with this. Though I must say I would have preferred more ME2 squadmates in the roster such as Grunt, Jack, and Legion. They could have ditched James and EDI as squadmates if need be. I like them fine but they are pretty uninteresting after a couple playthroughs. Plus they didn't need to be squadmates when there are far more popular characters that could have been squadmates instead.

In all honesty they should have made the roster 8 or 9 squadmates. With the possible squadmates:

Garrus
Tali
Liara
Javik
Kaidan/Ashley
Grunt
Jack
Miranda
Legion (should have lived if Peace was achieved)

Vega while cool was so unnecesary when we could have just had Grunt to fill his tank role.....and EDI....well..........her getting a body was fine and all....but she was the most unecessary squadmate ever.....

Modifié par darthnick427, 18 février 2013 - 09:17 .

[BonFire5]

Yes, it did. I can't stand Liara
Javik is pretty awesome
Kaidan is kind of boring but better than Ashley
Ashley I can't really look at without getting creeped out
Garrus is still awesome
Tali has just gotten boring to me for some odd reason
EDI as a squad mate bothers me. Her flotation devices are bigger than Samara's and are there for all the people who wish they had a Real Doll.
James I want to like, but his writing just feels terrible.

Despite only being 5 people shorter than the ME2 squad, it feels really small with no choices. I stick to Garrus and Javik when I'm not forced to choose someone else. Kaidan I might bring around more, but the Paragon option with Male Shepard feels like a declaration of love sometimes.

[JamieCOTC]

No. Shepard's auto-dialogue hurt replay value way more than any of the suadmates.

[fiendishchicken]

My dream team is Miranda, Mordin, Legion, Javik, Thane, Samara, and James (Possibly the VS as well depending on their content).

I'm fine with trimming some of the fat from the ME2 team, but I hate that I can't have any character's really care about.

I'd only take Ashley if she had some kind of romance conflict with Miranda, and I had a chance to shut her up and address her whiny and ****y attitude.

Modifié par fiendishchicken, 18 février 2013 - 09:35 .

[N7Keller]

No. It's nice not having to run errands for my crew just so they wont die. Hated that in ME2. Its also nice not having so many squad mates. The focus for ME3 needed to be on the reapers, not your squad.

[fiendishchicken]

norcalgamer wrote...

No. It's nice not having to run errands for my crew just so they wont die. Hated that in ME2. Its also nice not having so many squad mates. The focus for ME3 needed to be on the reapers, not your squad.

Guess what, that didn't happen either.

[Sejborg]

Nope. The forced quest order ruined the replay value for me. And also the autodialogue.

[samgurl775]

It really sucks having so few squadmates, especially when you I couldn't even get my favorite (Ashley) until halfway through the game. It was different in ME1 - you were given all your squadmates from pretty much the beginning, and were given free reign with who to take on every single mission. I also felt like the lack of one on one talks with your squad between missions hurt the game too.

[Shaleist]

Alex Arterius wrote...

Am I alone on this?

I found the squad pretty boring to say the least... minus Garrus, Liara and Javik really.

One thing I really liked about ME2 was all the awesome characters and i loved to do new play throughs using different charcters on different missions to hear what they had to say.

On ME3 i'm seriously limited on options though, EDI and James are completely uninteresting and the Virmire Survivor and Tali can hardly be held up to the likes of Mordin and Legion.

Anyone else think more squad mates should have been included + more interesting ones?

Yes. I always complain about this more than anything else.  ME3 squad was boring city overall.  I throw in Traynor/Cortez too since they're boring as Hell too.

norcalgamer wrote...

No. It's nice not having to run
errands for my crew just so they wont die. Hated that in ME2. Its also
nice not having so many squad mates. The focus for ME3 needed to be on
Cerberderrrrrrr, not your squad.

fixed that for all of us. 

Modifié par Shaleist, 18 février 2013 - 09:59 .

[tevix]

The desire for ME2 squadmates to come back has been done to death so I'll move past that. The ME3 selection at first glance seems rather slim until you realize the amount of unique squad interaction and character development that was put in. Even on multiple playthroughs I find getting to know the squad enjoyable. The only one that really gets me is the VS. In one moment they seem well developed and the next completely forgotten. Complaints about Ash's lack of progression on her spiritual track and EXTREME lack of commentary aboard the Normandy is a perfect example. I know, I know "line budgets". I don't care. Could have been done better.

[Dabrikishaw]

I was put off by the saturation of Mass Effect 1 squadmates compared to the 2 new squad-mates and 1 returning character, so yes.

[Pelle6666]

Almost always took Garrus and Tali or Javik and Liara. Some times a character fits a mission better than another so, no. did not feel like this ruined anything. Kinda felt like there could have been more interaction with them on board the Normandy though.

[David7204]

How much interaction on the Normandy is enough?

[Mr.House]

Nope, I loved the squad in ME3(just wished I could replace EDI with Miranda), the squad in ME2 bored me to tears.

[Tempest_]

Yate wrote...

CynicalShep wrote...

I wouldn't say that the ME3 squad is the reason for reduced replay value. In fact, it wasn't all that bad - Javik was interesting. EDI was not bad (except her new body was a little "extreme"). Main problem is that a lot of the ME2 characters got shoved under the rug and most of them were interesting enough not to warrant such treatment.

ME3 had many issues (imho) and this is but one of them. Not the main reason but definitely part of it.

yeah yeah, just like when ME2 came out and all you people wanted was the old squad

same old same old

Well to be fair, Garrus and Tali were ME1 squadmates that featured in ME2. Liara returns for a fairly lengthy DLC. That means 3 out the 5 possible (Kaiden or Ashley dead) original squadmates make an appearance as a squadmate in the second game. Even if we discount Liara, it's still 2 out of 5.

No squadmate introduced in Mass Effect 2 is on the squad in Mass Effect 3. So yeah I get the disappointment. Though, it was always going to be difficult to implement them because of the Suicide Mission so I understand the omission.

I still think however that a solitary ME2 squadmate should have been implemented. Even if it was as late as Thessia, so that content wouldn't have had to be that extensive.

Still it's not a game breaker for me since I like the Mass Effect 3 squad.  Though, at the same time most of my faves were part of the dirty dozen.

[Dr_Extrem]

this is definately not a reason ..

i have others .. but they are not an answer to your question.

[TheChris92]

I think the problem lies in the fact that ME2 introduced too many squadmates, and that resulted in less interaction and/or character development for each of them. It was also inevitable that most of the said squaddies roles would be miniscule in the third game. You could barely keep track of them all. I prefer how it was in ME1, where your squad isn't ridiculously big, which also meant more conversations and interesting development for each character. At the very least they could have added 1 of the ME2 squadmates to the Normandy crew in ME3. But all in all I think a smaller squad is more interesting

Modifié par TheChris92, 18 février 2013 - 11:22 .

[tevix]

@Thechris92

I find the interaction in 2, and the development in 3 the best. A lot of crew interaction (after missions anyway) in 3 is auto-dialogue, but you have more influence on the direction characters take.

[moater boat]

Lots of things ruined the replay value for me. I suppose the fact that some of the best characters from the series were pretty much thrown under the bus is somewhere on that list.