119 réponses à ce sujet

[NRieh]

 

They're certainly talking about N7 a lot and what it means to the fans so I think they're most probably "playing it safe" with the PC being N7 soldier again.

Weren't we told that the N7 person from the trailer is not our PC?  

[Dean_the_Young]

One problem is that the aliens are remarkably long lived (Samara, Wrex both of which lives actually involve combat as well) and some of them are actually spec ops style (Thane, Mordin), "naturally endowed" (Jack, Miranda), trained in the womb (Grunt) or matrix style learning (Legion).

 

The ones that go against the flow are Garrus, Kasumi, Tali and Liara. Garrus is pretty much paramilitary while Kasumi's combat is as her profession dictates, closer to how Thane does things in the FMVs. Which reminds me of how the gap between them performing in FMVs and game combat was ridiculously large (Jack particularly).

 

Liara was over a hundred and had practice from young with her biotics. Tali's entire combat training was rather a joke but to be fair, she was really weak in combat if you selected her for your teammate and left it to the AI

 

You're right in that there's no need for a military link as simply being an scientist studying in an environment with hostile fauna for a few years and you get combat and survival training through simple practical experience but for everyone except Tali, their ability to fight was sufficiently supported through their background.

 

Which is all fine and not a problem- since the point is that the background doesn't need to be military to support being a combat-capable protagonist.

 

Nor do you really need significant establishing background at all- plenty of Bioware PC's are exceptional fighters without having any formal training: they just happen to be good from the moment the player picks up the sword, and the 'why' is never more than a throw-away. Most Wardens had paper-thin justifications more inferred than elaborated. Hawke might have been the battle at Ostagar, but they weren't a professional soldier and there's never any exceptional training regimine to justify standing out. The only Inquisitor background that mandates any combat experience or significant combat training is the Qunari mercenary: the rest are not incompatible with exceptional pasts, but don't require it either, and the PC's combat abilities aren't why they're important. In SWTOR, the Bounty Hunter and Smuggler aren't established as trained, but stand toe-to-toe with those that are (and only one, Trooper, is military). And this doesn't even touch on non-Bioware PCs, like the entire Fallout series or Elder Scrolls and various others in which the PC gets no backstory training at all.

 

It's not like Bioware, or the player base, is new to this. The idea that PC's need well established training credentials to be a PC is rather undermined by the multitude of PCs who get by just fine without them.

[Laughing_Man]

Which is all fine and not a problem- since the point is that the background doesn't need to be military to support being a combat-capable protagonist.

 

Nor do you really need significant establishing background at all- plenty of Bioware PC's are exceptional fighters without having any formal training: they just happen to be good from the moment the player picks up the sword, and the 'why' is never more than a throw-away. Most Wardens had paper-thin justifications more inferred than elaborated. Hawke might have been the battle at Ostagar, but they weren't a professional soldier and there's never any exceptional training regimine to justify standing out. The only Inquisitor background that mandates any combat experience or significant combat training is the Qunari mercenary: the rest are not incompatible with exceptional pasts, but don't require it either, and the PC's combat abilities aren't why they're important. In SWTOR, the Bounty Hunter and Smuggler aren't established as trained, but stand toe-to-toe with those that are (and only one, Trooper, is military). And this doesn't even touch on non-Bioware PCs, like the entire Fallout series or Elder Scrolls and various others in which the PC gets no backstory training at all.

 

It's not like Bioware, or the player base, is new to this. The idea that PC's need well established training credentials to be a PC is rather undermined by the multitude of PCs who get by just fine without them.

 

I do think that having formal military training makes more sense if your PC is going to suddenly go rambo on all the local thugs of Andromeda.

I mean, give civilians weapons and throw them to the front lines of a warzone. Most of them will die very quickly.

 

So while in RPG's generally you "train" as you "level up", if you try to make a game that makes sense not just inside the "logic" of traditional RPG's, previous training are kinda required. (even in "traditional" RPG's most characters have *some* form of previous combat training, in relation to their class and archetype)

 

Another example: Far cry 3 & 4 had PC that had no combat training, but in under two minutes from the start of the game they already make mince meat of various mercenaries / soldiers etc. That pushed very hard my suspension of disbelief.

[Medhia_Nox]

@Dean_The_Young:  I disagree with something like Fallout.

 

You don't start capable with weaponry at all (though you can - which would suggest the training you're talking about).  If you play the game on the hardest level and you don't take any skills with weapons - combat can be VERY difficult.

 

But, in games like that you build your skill as you level creating the character you want.  You need never take any weapons skills in Fallout and you can always be quite ineffective in battles. I applaud this style of RP.

[Dean_the_Young]

I do think that having formal military training makes more sense if your PC is going to suddenly go rambo on all the local thugs of Andromeda.

I mean, give civilians weapons and throw them to the front lines of a warzone. Most of them will die very quickly.

 

So while in RPG's generally you "train" as you "level up", if you try to make a game that makes sense not just inside the "logic" of traditional RPG's, previous training are kinda required. (even in "traditional" RPG's most characters have *some* form of previous combat training, in relation to their class and archetype)

 

And yet military training has nothing unique or exceptional to justify going Rambo. 'Training' is not synonymous with 'military.' 'Civilian' does not mean 'untrained.'

 

This is the distinction people keep stumbling with when they say there needs to be a military background. What they're really getting at is that they want so justification of being trained- but they frequently can't think of anything outside of the military sector to justify that, even though Bioware has repeatedly given us many examples.

 

 

I don't see lack of imagination as a reason to need a military PC. Bioware can't even do a credible non-superficially military PC in the first place, going by their history. Many of the defining traits and hallmarks of professional militaries (adherence to standards and norms, pragmatism, deference to authority, abiding by limitations and restrictions, teamwork-focused organizations) are practically antithetical to the nominal Bioware RPG habit of unaccountability, unmanaged, effectively independent, and generally isolated PCs.

 

@Dean_The_Young:  I disagree with something like Fallout.

 

You don't start capable with weaponry at all (though you can - which would suggest the training you're talking about).  If you play the game on the hardest level and you don't take any skills with weapons - combat can be VERY difficult.

 

But, in games like that you build your skill as you level creating the character you want.  You need never take any weapons skills in Fallout and you can always be quite ineffective in battles. I applaud this style of RP.

 

What do level up mechanics have to do with narrative backstory justification?

 

All games with level up mechanics will be very difficult if you don't put points into skills with weapons. Soldier Shep can be played without putting any points into weapon skills. There's no reason not to, but you can, and the game gets harder as a result- but that doesn't change the narrative justification for Shepherd, which includes 'N7 military special forces' no matter what. And no matter how many points you put in what skills in Fallout, the Courier never gets a military backstory.

[General TSAR]

Another example: Far cry 3 & 4 had PC that had no combat training, but in under two minutes from the start of the game they already make mince meat of various mercenaries / soldiers etc. That pushed very hard my suspension of disbelief.

Yeah that was my problem too.

 

They should have implemented a mechanic where after you kill someone, you can't pull the trigger for like 5-10 minutes with your PC saying "No, I can't do it" every time you attempt to shoot someone or slash someone. After 5-10 minutes, and another kill later, your character will say "Maybe I can" and only wait a couple minutes. After the next kill, your character should say, "This....this is...easy" and then go to the default mass murderer state. 

 

Also your hands should be trembling for the first couple times you killed the baddies, but after like 10 kills they fully stabilize.

[Mistic]

I don't see lack of imagination as a reason to need a military PC. Bioware can't even do a credible non-superficially military PC in the first place, going by their history. Many of the defining traits and hallmarks of professional militaries (adherence to standards and norms, pragmatism, deference to authority, abiding by limitations and restrictions, teamwork-focused organizations) are practically antithetical to the nominal Bioware RPG habit of unaccountability, unmanaged, effectively independent, and generally isolated PCs.

 

Ha! That's so true. Even in Mass Effect: a few hours after starting the game, Shepard becomes a super-agent that only answers to the galactic government.

 

As you said, other Bioware games such as SWTOR and Dragon Age provide many good examples of a protagonist that doesn't need a military background. Heck, Shepard's authority in most part of ME is being a Spectre or a Cerberus agent. Why can't the same happen here?

 

History aks the same. Most explorers and conquerors from the Age of Discovery didn't have any professional military background and expeditions were carried out without much royal input ("you can go there and explore and conquer, as long as you claim the territories in our name and give the crown a part of the valuables you find"). For example, Hernán Cortés studied Law and was a notary and a clerk before becoming the conqueror of Mexico. They led military campaigns because there was no one else to do that (despite their fame and impact, the Spanish conquistadores were a small bunch of amateurs in comparison with the big and well-trained armies of tercios in Italy and Flanders).

[Ahriman]

Ha! That's so true. Even in Mass Effect: a few hours after starting the game, Shepard becomes a super-agent that only answers to the galactic government.

 

And same Shepard goes full "Yes, my admiral! Whatever you command, my admiral! All hail Alliance!" the second he's reinstated by people who previously stripped off his ranks and put him under house arrest for fighting Reapers. Not speaking that my Shepard already was a Spectre when they did it.

[Han Shot First]

I do think that having formal military training makes more sense if your PC is going to suddenly go rambo on all the local thugs of Andromeda.

I mean, give civilians weapons and throw them to the front lines of a warzone. Most of them will die very quickly.

 

So while in RPG's generally you "train" as you "level up", if you try to make a game that makes sense not just inside the "logic" of traditional RPG's, previous training are kinda required. (even in "traditional" RPG's most characters have *some* form of previous combat training, in relation to their class and archetype)

 

Another example: Far cry 3 & 4 had PC that had no combat training, but in under two minutes from the start of the game they already make mince meat of various mercenaries / soldiers etc. That pushed very hard my suspension of disbelief.

 

There is also the issue of why someone with no military experience would be in command. The farm kid on some far flung colony that defends his home against a pirate raid isn't going to suddenly be placed in command of a warship, just because he picked up a rifle and managed to save his farm. What does he know about flying a space ship, interstellar navigation, naval combat, ect? What would he know about small unit leadership, infantry tactics, weapons capabilities, or any of the skills necessary to be plausibly competent in the role the character is placed in?

 

I think that sort of thing works better in fantasy series than Sci Fi.

 

That isn't to say that you couldn't have a character with a civilian background, but I think that civilian background would also have to rooted in a profession that makes them at least plausible for the role they'll be playing during the game. So C-Sec, a private mercenary, a security contractor for one of the game universe's corporations, ect. 

[windsea]

I know it will not happen but i want a "smart" background, be it scientist or whatever.

 

i know the PC is set up so that they could explain stuff to the player but i want a character that KNOW stuff. 

[General TSAR]

I know it will not happen but i want a "smart" background, be it scientist or whatever.

Well the engineer class is a "smart" background. 

[Thetford]

Well the engineer class is a "smart" background. 

I wish they included a lot more techy dialogue options though for engineers (and more biotic ones for adepts - why couldn't biotic Shepard have gone to Brain camp and reminisce with Kaiden?)

[Dean_the_Young]

There is also the issue of why someone with no military experience would be in command. The farm kid on some far flung colony that defends his home against a pirate raid isn't going to suddenly be placed in command of a warship, just because he picked up a rifle and managed to save his farm. What does he know about flying a space ship, interstellar navigation, naval combat, ect? What would he know about small unit leadership, infantry tactics, weapons capabilities, or any of the skills necessary to be plausibly competent in the role the character is placed in?

 

I think that sort of thing works better in fantasy series than Sci Fi.

 

That isn't to say that you couldn't have a character with a civilian background, but I think that civilian background would also have to rooted in a profession that makes them at least plausible for the role they'll be playing during the game. So C-Sec, a private mercenary, a security contractor for one of the game universe's corporations, ect. 

 

I'm recalling an old article I once read about how there were two main types of sci-fi with FTL: 'expensive' FTL, in which space ships can only be afforded by the government and in which militaries, governments, and mega-corporations have space ships that are led by professionals, and 'cheap' FTL in which space ships are an established technology that;s cheap and wide-spread enough to be found in private hands,

 

It was a pretty decent consideration of the breakdown. In 'expensive' FTL where only the richest can afford the capital-intensive ships, the sci-fi stories are frequently more of a political focus based around the interests of the organizations that can afford space travel- and often focus on younger professional types in hierarchial organizations. But in 'cheap' FTL, stories could be more flexible with more informal rank systems and such.

 

Mass Effect was somewhere between them. In 1-3, FTL was definitely 'cheap': warships were expensive, but almost anyone could afford  space ship. But in Andromeda, we're probably back to a far more limited/expensive FTL context, where ships are precious and scarce and not loaned out lightly by the central authority..

 

 

That said...
 

 

What does he know about flying a space ship, interstellar navigation, naval combat, ect? What would he know about small unit leadership, infantry tactics, weapons capabilities, or any of the skills necessary to be plausibly competent in the role the character is placed in?

 

 

I'm just going to point out that Shepherd and co were never particularly competent in execution, when Shepherd wasn't being downright horribly inept. Shepherd and co's skills were always far more of the 'told, not shown' sort of narrative.

[MisterJB]

Assuming the N7 armor was ours, we would be the most elite soldiers in the Alliance military.

And we were sent away during the greatest war galactic civilization has ever seen? Ok.

[Computron2000]

There is also the issue of why someone with no military experience would be in command. The farm kid on some far flung colony that defends his home against a pirate raid isn't going to suddenly be placed in command of a warship, just because he picked up a rifle and managed to save his farm. What does he know about flying a space ship, interstellar navigation, naval combat, ect? What would he know about small unit leadership, infantry tactics, weapons capabilities, or any of the skills necessary to be plausibly competent in the role the character is placed in?

 

I think that sort of thing works better in fantasy series than Sci Fi.

 

That isn't to say that you couldn't have a character with a civilian background, but I think that civilian background would also have to rooted in a profession that makes them at least plausible for the role they'll be playing during the game. So C-Sec, a private mercenary, a security contractor for one of the game universe's corporations, ect. 

 

Not necessarily. It depends on how the initial game start is done. You may be a civillian scientist who spent the last 5 years in the most dangerous wild planet in the sector and got drafted in to head the science division. In a military organization, this means you get rank (lets say colonel) for hierachical purposes. Lets say all the command staff (of higher rank than you) get killed in some incident.

 

As the next highest rank, you end up in command by default (though at the start, some will question having an egg head lead)

 

Alternatively, you're not in command at all. Rather, you're sent in as part of a scout team to evaluate colony sites and minerals. The scout team lead gets himself killed by some rampaging fauna and the rest panic. Since you've survived in worse conditions, you get them out and on return, command thinks you should lead the remaining scout team on the next missions (they lack ready replacements). Further on, you may conlfict with command's decisions (such as getting you to poison the natives' water source) and you do things your own way instead since you've been doing things your way for the last 5 years (and of course leading to further conflicts internally and externally)

[CrutchCricket]

Assuming the N7 armor was ours, we would be the most elite soldiers in the Alliance military.

And we were sent away during the greatest war galactic civilization has ever seen? Ok.

Maybe we were discharged. Or ran.

 

Nobody said we had to be upstanding. In fact I'd prefer if we weren't. Even in full on Renegade dick mode the assumption was that Shepard pretty much got with the program. Maybe this new PC is a true renegade.

[Silcron]

[snip]

 

 

I'm just going to point out that Shepherd and co were never particularly competent in execution, when Shepherd wasn't being downright horribly inept. Shepherd and co's skills were always far more of the 'told, not shown' sort of narrative.

 

I have to disagree with you here, while this happened a few times I also recall some times in which the skills were shown, but only in cutscenes. The prime example being Jack's intro in ME2.

[stysiaq]

I want to be a missionary slash conquistador.

[maia0407]

I would love to play as a scientist with combat experience. I can imagine a few ways that having expertise in a science field as well as exceptional combat skills could be explained. If I were writing the series, I would set it up so there is a new technology that lengthens lifespans for humans. That way, they could have more than one career in their lifetime. But, I would limit this technology by either having it only work on 'compatible' individuals or be so expensive that only 'exceptional' individuals receive the treatment.

 

Alternatively, I invent a new technology that allowed 'downloading' of careers into the brain. So, a military person could receive a download of a botanist career. Again, only certain compatible or exceptional people would be eligible for the download. I would also limit the number of downloads to one by stating that the brain can't safely integrate too many downloads. I would also require that the download become more fully integrated by experience. As in, you gain knowledge through the download but only become an experienced in the field by putting that knowledge to use. That would be a gameplay mechanic.

 

In my game, having both science and combat training would be an essential requirement for those going on an expedition to Andromeda.

[Mistic]

Assuming the N7 armor was ours, we would be the most elite soldiers in the Alliance military.

And we were sent away during the greatest war galactic civilization has ever seen? Ok.

 

It makes sense. You do need some good guardians to protect what you think it's the last chance for the survival of our galactic civilization. Even without counting the Reapers, the Milky Way has had a bug horde, the krogans, many wars and conflicts, and even your usual pirates and mercenaries can pose a threat. With millions of soldiers to choose from, why shouldn't they send a hundred or so to protect them in Andromeda?

 

Of course, some may call that line of thought "defeatism" (allocating resources that could be valuable for our galaxy's defense to a project that is based on the idea that we are going to lose against the Reapers), but since we are talking about the prospect of galaxy-wide genocide and not just being conquered and exploited by some people we hate, I can understand their point.