70 réponses à ce sujet

[Cross Jaeger]

are asking fans what they want to see in the new mass effect, well I personally think they should focus in the relationship of the protagonist with friends and his beloved, as in previous mass effect the relationship he had with his partner It was simple and cold, once in the entire game and was all, not deepen and gets boring, I do not remember shepard given a simple kiss his beloved, leave behind the taboo of sex and add more details.

[fraggle]

I'm always for more teammate interaction! I felt it was severly lacking in ME1 and 2, but in 3 it was better done and more imo.

However it would be great if they expand this a bit more. The relationships you build are a huge part in the games and I'd love to see even more and deeper connections with your companions.

[Cross Jaeger]

I'm always for more teammate interaction! I felt it was severly lacking in ME1 and 2, but in 3 it was better done and more imo.

However it would be great if they expand this a bit more. The relationships you build are a huge part in the games and I'd love to see even more and deeper connections with your companions.

yea you are right the relationship with your companions It is what makes you involved in the game, I would also like to add more variety of vehicles to move around the map.

[Excella Gionne]

I'd like my crew to be like the DA crew where they will disagree or agree with you based on decisions, because in ME they always seem to agree without expressing their disagreement. If I were to sacrifice the Quarians over the Geth, I'd like my crew to be angry with my decision and maybe even resent me. But nope, that's not the case.

[Cross Jaeger]

I'd like my crew to be like the DA crew where they will disagree or agree with you based on decisions, because in ME they always seem to agree without expressing their disagreement. If I were to sacrifice the Quarians over the Geth, I'd like my crew to be angry with my decision and maybe even resent me. But nope, that's not the case.

It is a good idea, I think the krogan are romantic jajajja oh my rose blue of illium under the sun of tuchanka jajjaja

[KaiserShep]

I'd like my crew to be like the DA crew where they will disagree or agree with you based on decisions, because in ME they always seem to agree without expressing their disagreement. If I were to sacrifice the Quarians over the Geth, I'd like my crew to be angry with my decision and maybe even resent me. But nope, that's not the case.

EDI does get upset over the geth decision if you side with the quarians, but yeah, it'd be nice to see crew members object to certain decisions, potentially locking out any content specific to a friendship/romance path.

[Cross Jaeger]

I would also like it the next time the campaign has nothing to do with the multiplayer that are different things.

[Larry-3]

I would enjoyed more interactions with the background crew. There were people working on the terminals in the CIC, some sitting around the crew deck, and a few standing around the shuttle bay -- why could I not speak to them? I would have liked to have the option to select them all "press A to speak". Even if they say something generic like, "everything is good across the board, Boss." Or if not that, then maybe get funny messages from them on my private terminal.

Example:

Unread message 1
"Hey, Commander! Burt here. Kasumi is really hot. Hook your favorite CIC guard up."

Unread message 2
"Hey, it is Sarah Patel. I am happy to help you for as long as you need me, but if I work double hard, can you arrange me and crewmen Rolston to work in the same area of the ship... just because."

Unread message 3
"Commander, Me, Ken, Gabby, and Mathews have decided to go out for awhile the next time we are docked at the Citadel. You have all the fun out there while we spend all day staring at terminals. If you say no we might mutiny, well maybe not that, but you are welcome to join us. P.S. we are all cough up on our assignments... except for Mathews... he's probably thinking about Sha'ira. Leaving me and EDI to finish his work."

[BurningBlood]

I'd like my crew to be like the DA crew where they will disagree or agree with you based on decisions, because in ME they always seem to agree without expressing their disagreement. If I were to sacrifice the Quarians over the Geth, I'd like my crew to be angry with my decision and maybe even resent me. But nope, that's not the case.

 

 

EDI does get upset over the geth decision if you side with the quarians, but yeah, it'd be nice to see crew members object to certain decisions, potentially locking out any content specific to a friendship/romance path.

 

Ash gets upset if you side with the Geth, and takes Tali's death quite hard.

 

But yeah, two squadmates disagree with one choice you make over the course of three games.  Not a whole lot of opposition there.

[dgcatanisiri]

Approval dynamics, like in the Dragon Age series, are DESPERATELY needed - It's ALWAYS bugged me that Liara ends up going to the ends of the universe to recover Shepard's body on the basis that she 'couldn't let them go' when Shepard could have never spoken with her outside of the mission debriefings or did but was a racist, xenophobic ******* towards her, and Garrus and Tali should have had negative reactions if Shepard had done similar with them. But instead, any time a character returned in a new game, they were assumed to be one of Shepard's best friends.

 

It just makes me feel out of control of Shepard's relationship dynamics with these characters, when they're telling us that Shepard is supposed to be our character. Not to mention the way that, narratively, it seems that the narrative frames agreeing with Shepard unconditionally is to be rewarded, while questioning them is punished. Characters should be able to argue and disagree with the PC. It's also good for role-playing - if you take an action that a character disapproves of, maybe there's a way to look at the action that turns and gives it more depth and reason than just 'I did a good thing because I'm good' and make it more 'I took this action because I found it the least bad of the possible options and I wish I could have done something else' or even 'you're right, that was a mistake, I shouldn't have done it.' Just gives our character and RP options a little more depth in being able to interact with these characters, who, IMO, are often the most important element of the games.

[Ajensis]

But yeah, two squadmates disagree with one choice you make over the course of three games.  Not a whole lot of opposition there.

 

Try speaking with your (remaining) crew after you've completed ME2. Either most or everyone makes a comment about what you chose to do with the Collector Base.

[KaiserShep]

Approval dynamics, like in the Dragon Age series, are DESPERATELY needed - It's ALWAYS bugged me that Liara ends up going to the ends of the universe to recover Shepard's body on the basis that she 'couldn't let them go' when Shepard could have never spoken with her outside of the mission debriefings or did but was a racist, xenophobic ******* towards her, and Garrus and Tali should have had negative reactions if Shepard had done similar with them. But instead, any time a character returned in a new game, they were assumed to be one of Shepard's best friends.

 

I agree. I'd love to be able to have companions that were a bit warier of the PC because of certain actions that they may object to.

 

Garrus is the perfect example. If I allow the geth to wipe out the quarians, Garrus should not only be saddened; he should be pissed. He has no reason to support allying with the killbots that nearly got everyone wiped out over his good friend and her entire race. If anything, his total demeanor should change. He should have some level of passion about something. He'd be much more convincing as a character if his personality can shift based on our decisions, rather than being the perma-bro.

[fraggle]

Try speaking with your (remaining) crew after you've completed ME2. Either most or everyone makes a comment about what you chose to do with the Collector Base.

 

It's not really about those single sentence. They are a nice touch, but it's simply not enough.

Take DA:I for example, when we saw the first gameplay videos they showed. We were told we could make choices that could majorly p*ss off one of your companions depending on which choice you make. Unfortunately this never made it into the game. Not really anyway. The big impact on your choices and decisions is really lacking imo.

 

What I hope for is that at some point, you can get certain companions to being so pissed off based on your actions that they want to leave (yes, I know that can happen in Dragon Age, but you have to actually be mean to the characters and p*ss them off in that way). Then you can decide if you want to work on this relationship and give it a chance, or if you agree that it's better if the companion leaves.

It'd be so interesting to see if opinions of your own character and companions are colliding with each other, and having to work hard for a relationship to work. Not just characters that blindly follow you and accept everything you're doing. It would add a lot of depth and realism.

[KaiserShep]

I suppose one thing to consider is that some companions may be following you under official assignment, so they cannot oppose you too much like a DA companion would, at least within reason, but could at least lock out the friendly dialogue, any companion quests they may have, and block out any romance content the writers put in there. The ragtag group though would be a total free for all. If that companion is pissed off enough, I'd love to see them tell the PC that they're leaving when they hit the next hub.

 

PC: "Where are you going?"

 

Companion: "Getting the hell off this boat. You're an a-hole, and I'd rather ride coach in the bowels of a freighter back to my homeworld than travel with you."

[KrrKs]

I'm not sure if i really want that kind of mechanic.

In theory it sounds great, and I'm all for more crew feedback, but <having only played DA:O> the Dragon Age approval system is a complete mess in itself. Especially with unclear morality characters, like Morrigan.

I also would hate to have the gift system in ME and have to buy shiny somethings so that X/Y doesn't leave my ship and prevent me from doing quest #315.

[KaiserShep]

I'm not sure if i really want that kind of mechanic.

In theory it sounds great, and I'm all for more crew feedback, but <having only played DA:O> the Dragon Age approval system is a complete mess in itself. Especially with unclear morality characters, like Morrigan.

I also would hate to have the gift system in ME and have to buy shiny somethings so that X/Y doesn't leave my ship and prevent me from doing quest #315.

 

BioWare's reworked the approval system since Origins, and they got rid of being able to spam bribes to companions in DA2 and Inquisition.

 

One biggest thing I really enjoy about the approval system is that you have more control over who treats you like a close friend or not. If you don't really care much for Garrus, you don't have to kill him off to get rid of his chummy banter. He may just address you differently if he doesn't like you as much. It makes characters less passive. They do more than just feebly object while you do something psychotic.

[Han Shot First]

I'd like my crew to be like the DA crew where they will disagree or agree with you based on decisions, because in ME they always seem to agree without expressing their disagreement. If I were to sacrifice the Quarians over the Geth, I'd like my crew to be angry with my decision and maybe even resent me. But nope, that's not the case.

 

This. I think they should definitely make the squad a bit more opinionated, and if it makes sense for the character, more likely to object to some actions taken by the protagonist.

 

Having said that...I think the devs also have to be careful when going that route. It wouldn't make sense for a character who absolutely hates the protagonist (or vice versa) to stick together until the end, so it either has to be written in a way that the characters are more rivals than enemies or there has to be an option for that companion character to either quit or be kicked off the team. The latter however is problematic if the game is part of a duology or trilogy, because now that companion character has varying world states that have to be accounted for in a sequel. It presents the same problems as having characters that could be casualties in the first or second game of a trilogy. So if ME:Next is part of a multi-game series, I'd prefer the devs only allow the protagonist and companion characters to be rivals rather than enemies. The alternative would saddle the series with too many imported variables that are likely to be resolved in a disappointing fashion. 

 

Of course the concerns about variables aren't an issue in a stand-alone game where you won't have companion characters returning as companions in a sequel. There you could have any character quit or be killed without worrying about accounting for it in the next chapter.

[themikefest]

I like to have a disapproval/approval system not just for the main charcter, but for the squadmates and crew as well. If one of them do something that's questionable, whatever it is, I like to ask them about it and if its severe enough, kick them off the ship.

[Vazgen]

I like to have a disapproval/approval system not just for the main charcter, but for the squadmates and crew as well. If one of them do something that's questionable, whatever it is, I like to ask them about it and if its severe enough, kick them off the ship.

I'd go farther. Approval/disapproval system within the squadmates. So that your and their actions or words may cause confrontations between squadmates.

Example

[Larry-3]

[After reading all the comments]

"Larry-3 Slightly Approves"

[Ajensis]

It's not really about those single sentence. They are a nice touch, but it's simply not enough.

(...)

 

I don't disagree I just merely wanted to point out that his/her data was incomplete.

 

In theory it sounds great, and I'm all for more crew feedback, but <having only played DA:O> the Dragon Age approval system is a complete mess in itself. Especially with unclear morality characters, like Morrigan.

 

I'm not sure, actually. Isn't it also kind of awesome to have characters that aren't black and white, that you can't summarise in a single sentence and immediately know how to please?

 

I'd go farther. Approval/disapproval system within the squadmates. So that your and their actions or words may cause confrontations between squadmates.

Example

 

While it sounds awesome in theory, I'm starting to worry about the amount of work they'd have to put into this. Think of the variables it could probably only work with a small crew.

[Vazgen]

While it sounds awesome in theory, I'm starting to worry about the amount of work they'd have to put into this. Think of the variables it could probably only work with a small crew.

Which I hope we'll get. I don't want another 13 squadmates, 6-7 is more than enough for me. And they can limit these confrontations to the major events. Like curing the genophage, for example

[Ajensis]

Which I hope we'll get. I don't want another 13 squadmates, 6-7 is more than enough for me. And they can limit these confrontations to the major events. Like curing the genophage, for example

 

Sorry, 'small crew' is pretty ambiguous. I was thinking even fewer than 6 or 7. But yeah, if it's only triggered by major events like that, it seems more reasonable

 

Also, yes, I too would strongly prefer 6-7 squadmates over 13

[Pasquale1234]

The formula of having 2 starting squadmates who are part of the organization the PC leads and therefore cannot leave has worked pretty well thus far.

I like having squadmates with plot relevance. So long as they're not killable, the devs wouldn't have to create replacements for them, and could focus more content on the originals.

Fewer squadmates == more content for each - which is great, but it can also mean that some players might not find an LI to their taste.

But, yeah, I like it when companions challenge the PC and each other. Here's hoping we'll get more of that going forward.

6-8 squadmates works for me, and could hopefully strike the right balance in terms of combat skills, ideologies, LIs, etc.