23 réponses à ce sujet

[spinachdiaper]

I would suggest that the Next Mass Effect drops the number of companions down to six, but with a twist that NME has many more than six companions but not everyone will just join and here is how I think I could go. I would have the companions decided but the main character creation options:

 

1. First there would be two standard companions that everyone gets.

2. Next there will be two companions but one joins male main characters only while the other goes female maincharacter only.

3. Then there will be three other characters determined by main character backstory so one for spacer, colonist, earthborn or their equivalents in NME.

4. The next of six characters will selected by which class the main character and the twist is this character will be the opposite class of the main chararter so playing a soldier will give you a sentinel companion, a sniper will get a vandguard, and a boitic will get an engineer.

5. The Last might be decided by player race or species if NME has the option to be not human so Human, Drell, Asari, Krogan, Quarian,Turian, Salarian, Batarian?, and Vorcha? would determine this character or It could be like a Samara Vs Mornith(ME2) decison or Mira Vs HannHarr (SWKotOR2SL) with previous player actions predetermining the choice.

 

Total companion characters possible: 15 or 24

2 - non-variable characters

1/1 - M/F

1/1/1 - Backstory

1/1/1/1/1/1 - Class

1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1 or 1/1 - Race/ Species or Choice

 

It might be a bit too much but It would make replays very interesting.

 

 

[Linkenski]

Certainly would. The question is "will there be a sequel?" because if there is Bioware probably can't do it unless all squad mates get thrown to the side in a new game.

[spinachdiaper]

Certainly would. The question is "will there be a sequel?" because if there is Bioware probably can't do it unless all squad mates get thrown to the side in a new game.

I'd be Ok with that and the 2 Standard companion characters could still return in NME2

[InterrogationBear]

Never going to happen. Your idea requires an absurd amount of dialog and other content most people would never experience.

 

The average player finishes the game once. You can't lock players out of so much content.

[oZ0NED 0UTo]

i like the idea of having a choice of who my squad is but i'm not big on having gender, species, and class having such a big influence on what your options are. i do like the idea of more choices like samara vs morinth. maybe we could also have morality locked companions like say clover and jericho from fallout 3.

[Judas Bock]

I'm all for not having access to all companions in a single playthrough, but I would not like to see it determined by your class/species/background. I would like to see it determined by your actions. Here are some suggestions I have that would make it interesting:

 

1) Characters who will only join if your moralities align. For instance, there might be a super-paragon companion who will not join you if you have a reputation for being a renegade, because your morals clash too much.

 

2) Characters who will not join if you have certain other companions in your party. Similar to the above, but relating to your crew. Say you already have a Wreave-ish krogan on your team who's all for krogan dominance and absolutely hates turians and salarians for what they did to his people, and then you come across a salarian who absolutely detests the krogan and their mindless brutishness. The two will obviously not work well together, so then you have to make a choice of either keeping the krogan and not recruiting the salarian, or recruiting the salarian and leaving the krogan behind.

 

3) Characters who you meet at the same time, but have to make a choice of who to recruit. Perhaps you come across a special forces unit somewhere who are have been assaulted by some enemies and are now reduced to just two people, each of them in one part of the map, both of them under heavy fire. You only have time to save one of them. So, sort of like the Kaidan/Ashley choice but before you've even recruited them.

[wright1978]

Definitely not in favour of this. Not only would it likely mean massive amounts of companions with weak levels of content each, which many people would never get chance to experience. It also forces player's hand due to silly choices like Class etc which seems completely annoying. I think an open companion roster of around 8/9 is probably ideal, giving decent content and decent level of choice.

[Tonymac]

I'm not sure how BioWare will go about doing it, but I want them to consider things like keeping our companions with us.

 

For instance, in ME2 we were separated from squadmates and LIs of ME1.  

 

ME3 was even worse, because they were trying to shove their epic story down our throats - LI's and squadmates were almost completely cut off from us (in some cases)  for the duration of the game.

 

I'd like Bioware to consider this in the next game.  The character interactions ended up telling a much better story than the main story-line gave us in ME3.

[Sirzechs_Krios]

Never going to happen. Your idea requires an absurd amount of dialog and other content most people would never experience.

 

The average player finishes the game once. You can't lock players out of so much content.

So why should others have to deal with condense content because some people don't want to replay the game in different styles? this isn't COD, and even in Black ops that there was a certain amount variable choices, ME3 already suffer because bioware wanted to appease everyone so we ended up with mostly cutscene and occasional dialogue wheel, after ME1 background didn't mean jack so yes I definitely welcome background having a large impact on the game even if its just a background specific companion.

[Ulyces]

So why should others have to deal with condense content because some people don't want to replay the game in different styles? this isn't COD, and even in Black ops that there was a certain amount variable choices, ME3 already suffer because bioware wanted to appease everyone so we ended up with mostly cutscene and occasional dialogue wheel, after ME1 background didn't mean jack so yes I definitely welcome background having a large impact on the game even if its just a background specific companion.

Thats great logic. BioWare trying to appease everyone didnt work so they should only cater to those who want to replay the game 10 times? And this is a horrible idea, yes it would give more importance to backround, but at the cost of developed and likable characters. if there are upwards of 20 companions, how is bioware supposed to make them all as great and likable as Garrus, Tali, or Mordin? and to be honest, backround isnt supposed to mean jack ****. This is a game about the choices you make, and the way it develops into your own unique experience for Shepard in the present. It shouldnt be about some event that happened 20 years before, that you had no effect on and didnt experience. Certainly it can be added in some way like through a meeting with an npc from your past or a side quest, but not as a companion. or major character in the game! And getting one squad mate shouldn't restrict you from getting others, neither should background. Yes, it adds to replayability, but at the cost of a true connection with your squad mates, because they all have an alternative replacement. None of them are concrete characters iin the universe. Could anyone imagine if you had to choose between Wrex or Mordin, Miranda or Jacob, even Tali or Garrus? Its stupid to lock people out of the most likable characters because of backround and class, and will ruin character customization for those who care more about the characters of the Mass effect universe, which is likely the majority of these forums. It will just make the game about choosing," this specific backround to get so-so" or,"I want to be a sentinel, but only Soldiers get this companion" Its unfair, ridiculous, and will never be implemented. The reason it hasnt been implemented is because Bioware, and even Bethesda, the makers of games like fallout and skyrim, recognize that it would be ridiculous.

[Sirzechs_Krios]

Its quite hilarious that you mentioned Bethesda and Skyrim considering Skyrim has quests  that lock you out of content depending on what you choose.

[Sirzechs_Krios]

The Virmire Survivor and Dragon Age Companions must be a new concept to you then.

[Ulyces]

The Virmire Survivor and Dragon Age Companions must be a new concept to you then.

 

Its quite hilarious that you mentioned Bethesda and Skyrim considering Skyrim has quests  that lock you out of content depending on what you choose.

We arent talking about being locked out of content(which isnt  even what happens in those cases because you cant do certain things if you make certain choices, not through race), we are talking about locking out characters. And Skyrim wasnt a game as focused on characters as Bioware games, but even then you weren't kept from doing something or recruiting someone because of race or class, only through choices, as you said, which was my entire point. thank you for proving that. Dragon age companions could be recruited no matter the race or backround, which, as i said, is excellent and important, and the virmire survivor quest gave you a side quest based on your backround and a meeting with a minor npc, which was what i was thinking of when i said that Bioware could make backround important without locking in companions. So what was your point here?

[Sirzechs_Krios]

We arent talking about being locked out of content(which isnt  even what happens in those cases because you cant do certain things if you make certain choices, not through race), we are talking about locking out characters. And Skyrim wasnt a game as focused on characters as Bioware games, but even then you weren't kept from doing something or recruiting someone because of race or class, only through choices, as you said, which was my entire point. thank you for proving that. Dragon age companions could be recruited no matter the race or backround, which, as i said, is excellent and important, and the virmire survivor quest gave you a side quest based on your backround and a meeting with a minor npc, which was what i was thinking of when i said that Bioware could make backround important without locking in companions. So what was your point here?

Carver and Bethany in Dragon Age 2 is depends on class, so yeah Bioware has done it before.

 

The thread isn't just about Background, I used Background  as an example because its poorly expanded on, which over time background does affect which character remains with you in Dragon Age and I'm pretty sure choices is also in the OP,both Virmire Survivor can't be experience in ME3, that requires playthroughs and Mass effect  feature twelve characters many of which were hardly used (Legion was recruited at the end of the game for christ sake), which is exactly why they reduce the amount of squad mate in ME3, if you can replay a game that locks you out of companion based on a choice, what's the exact reason background or gender can't be a factor? 

[MissScarletTanager]

I'm not sure how BioWare will go about doing it, but I want them to consider things like keeping our companions with us.

 

For instance, in ME2 we were separated from squadmates and LIs of ME1.  

 

ME3 was even worse, because they were trying to shove their epic story down our throats - LI's and squadmates were almost completely cut off from us (in some cases)  for the duration of the game.

 

I'd like Bioware to consider this in the next game.  The character interactions ended up telling a much better story than the main story-line gave us in ME3.

 

That was actually one of the reasons I ended up taking Garrus and Tali with me as squadmates through all three games. And I romanced Garrus (mostly because he's goddamn awesome, but I'll admit that a small bit might have been because he's in all three games as a squaddie, even if he's only a LI in ME2 and 3). I'd actually headcanoned it as being kind of a thing. My Shepard wanted to foster cooperation in ME1, and as a biotic didn't have the skills of a fighter (Garrus) and a techie (Tali). ME2; Shepard was very wary of Cerberus and wanted to keep those she trusted most and knew her the best (again, Garrus and Tali... and possibly Joker/Chakwas) as close to her as possible. ME3 - the world's falling apart and she wants those she trusts by her, just like in ME2. And by that point, it's routine xD

[KaiserShep]

I prefer mutually exclusive companions to be kept to a minimum, ideally just one set. Too many and I have little doubt that the result would be watered down companions and lots of frustration over the idea that you're locked out of such a large number of party combos. Besides, it can feel grossly contrived to have a totally different character show up for the same story just because you're a different race gender or class. Heck the sibling death in DA2 is pretty tricky (I mean, why would Bethany approach an ogre as a ranged attacker? Sorry Carver, but you're prologue fodder).

[daveliam]

I don't mind a few mutually exclusive characters. 

 

I'm not a fan of having gender play a role, because the only reason why it would happen (that I can think of) would be to provide a romance option, which means I'll be stuck with some gal trying to get in my gay pants all day long (no means no, Ashley.....).  Class is also tricky (unless it's the same character, but their class changes to support yours).  In DA, it's easier, since there's only 3 classes.  In ME, there are six classes, so it just seems too complex.

 

Now 'alignment' based mutually exclusive characters (like Mira and Hanharr) or player decision-based mutually exclusive characters (like Ashley and Kaiden)?  Those I like and I'm okay with.  I would like to see some characters not join you because of how you act. 

 

I'd rather see them go back to 6 squad members and have 4 of them be mandatory and the other spots be open to two sets of mutually exclusive characters (one based on 'alignment' and the other being a Samara/Morinth style choice).  This way, it's only 8 characters altogether, but still gives you four different squad compositions for replay value.

[Ianamus]

I don't like the idea. If anything limits which companions you get it should be in-game decisions. I wouldn't want to have to play a different gender or class just to get a particular squad mate.

[goishen]

Never going to happen. Your idea requires an absurd amount of dialog and other content most people would never experience.

 

The average player finishes the game once. You can't lock players out of so much content.

 

 

Ultimately, it'd be locking yourself into so much content that the players will never see.

[MissScarletTanager]

I agree with a companion or two that change based on alignment and character decisions, such as Ashley/Kaidan. Just think; what if ME3 had the chance of a Batarian companion, but that companion would flat-out refuse to join you if you didn't try to contact the colony in Arrival and hailed the Normandy instead? I am a definite fan of decisions have far, multi-game reaching consequences (such as whether or not Tali was exiled or Legion alive leading to change your options during the Rannoch missions.)

[Vazgen]

I like the idea but it's a bit too extensive IMO. If Next Mass Effect has, say, 6 squadmates I'd give such options to maybe two and instead focus on developing class/race/species/sex through unique dialogue with some others. Talk to Kaidan about biotics if you are one, talk to Tali about tech, talk to Ashley about colony life if you're a colonist, talk to Kaidan about life in space if you're a spacer.

[Saberchic]

Never going to happen. Your idea requires an absurd amount of dialog and other content most people would never experience.

^This.

 

OP, your system is too complex and time consuming. Just have some companions and flesh those out really well. I'd rather have a small limited number of good companions than numerous ones that won't be done very well because it would take up too much time and resources to focus on that one aspect of the game.

[Maniccc]

Not a horrible idea, but I'd rather have something like this:

 

You get your standard 8 or 9 mates, but they have different non combat specialties.  So in different missions, some of those non-combat special abilities unlocks certain content/dialogue.  For instance, you're searching a wrecked ship on an environmentally hostile world.  You bring with your techie team mates, and they find things/information that leads to some side quest, or some such thing.  No techie/engineer mates with you?  No extra data is discovered.

 

I think this would work out better.  We saw something like it in the ME2 suicide mission, where you assigned mates to different roles that most suited them.  This sort of thing throughout the game, where you get a sort of mission briefing, as it were, and based on what you are expecting to deal with, you can choose the squaddies most suited to the task.

 

My idea is not going to happen, because it's cool, and Bioware is meh, but it's more likely to happen than OP's idea.

[katamuro]

While the idea itself is sound and it would provide for quite a lot of replay value the problem lies not even in locking the basic player who only finishes once out of the other options but in the insane amount of coding and rewriting dialogue for every conceivable option. Especially if characters are not just plastic silent dolls. the amount of dialogue for a 30-50 hour game with more than 12 variable characters would create gigabytes worth of audio data and coding just to make it all fit. Too much work for too little gain there, since only the people who would play the game at least 3 times would get the good piece of the content.