106 réponses à ce sujet

[Cyonan]

You were the one who replied to my original response about work.
 

I'll ask you the same thing. What do you think is the point of these choices you're advocating? What is it, narratively speaking, that they add the story?

 

From a narrative perspective they can offer setbacks or loss in a way that is much more powerful than a cutscene. Losing a crew member on the suicide mission because of a choice you personally made would have much more impact than Kai Leng showing up and besting you in a cutscene. It felt cheap when it happened on Thessia in Mass Effect 3.

 

Unfortunately, we can game the system and once you know the "correct" choices for the SM you can get through it without loss.

 

It also makes the choices themselves more interesting because there is no right answer. In Tali's mission I didn't even give a thought to handing the data over or not, I just took the Paragon option and yelled my way out of having to make a real choice.

 

However in Legion's mission? I stopped for a minute to actually think about it because there wasn't a "solve everything" button for me to press. It really was an extremely well designed mission, and I want to see more of it in ME:A.

[RoboticWater]

You were the one who replied to my original response about work.
 

I'll ask you the same thing. What do you think is the point of these choices you're advocating? What is it, narratively speaking, that they add the story?

I can't speak for Cyonan, but I think AlanC9 put it well: "It gives the player the experience of command in a difficult position."

 

In terms of indirect narrative aid: it suspends the player's disbelief more when they're not just handed a win button on a platter right from the game. It boosts investment in player choice by following the player's best decision rather than the one prescribed by the game.

 

More importantly, it makes the dialog system more like a complex gameplay element than a pass/fail cutscene.

[fchopin]

No more silly baby holding, if companions can not do the job they are supposed to be able to do then they should not be with us.

[RoboticWater]

No more silly baby holding, if companions can not do the job they are supposed to be able to do then they should not be with us.

I don't remember any of the loyalty missions implying that our companions couldn't handle things themselves. In ME2 you just happen to catch everyone in the middle of important business. It's not like these people are solders with nothing but service in their lives, these are people agendas and you can agree to offer your help.

 

In fact, I remember multiple times when I had to restrain my companions before they went too far.

[fchopin]

If you don't do their loyalty missions then they die so that means they should not be with us.

[RoboticWater]

If you don't do their loyalty missions then they die so that means they should not be with us.

That's the best we had available, and It's called the suicide mission for a reason.

 

It's lucky that we found so many incredibly skilled people willing to risk their lives, even luckier that the only things bothering their consciences could be solved in a day or less.

[The Heretic of Time]

Alright are we seriously white-knighting for fictional characters here? Now I've seen it all.

[Seboist]

No more silly baby holding, if companions can not do the job they are supposed to be able to do then they should not be with us.

 

+1

 

I don't want to have to engage in spectre therapy sessions (aka "loyalty missions") in order for squadmates to function, nor engaging in white man's burden to save aliens from themselves like in ME3 in order for them to support me.

[RoboticWater]

+1

 

I don't want to have to engage in spectre therapy sessions (aka "loyalty missions") in order for squadmates to function, nor engaging in white man's burden to save aliens from themselves like in ME3 in order for them to support me.

To be fair, Mordin and Legion solved the problems of their own respective races, you mostly just helped them along the way (or didn't if you were Renegade). However, there's always a level of white man's burden involved with BioWare's games (the hero comes in with their cool powers and fancy tech to solve some sect's internal problem) that always bugs me a little.

 

How might BioWare fix this?

[Suron]

it's funny how so many are missing the point.

 

the "loyalty missions" in ME2 were fine in and of themselves.  Not in the context of the story.  We're trying to stop the collectors.

 

If I'm on a team with Gandhi and Hitler and Gandhi is our leader.  I'm not going to all of a sudden be okay with, nor trust, Hitler at my back just because Gandhi helped me resolve some deep issue in my life.

 

That's the problem.  And what a lot of you criticizing those that didn't like the LM's in ME2 are basically saying.  And I find that a little short sighted, if not downright disturbing.

[BioWareM0d13]

I like the idea of side quests focused on your companion characters, but I'd hope the execution would be somewhat better than the squad mate missions in ME2.

 

The problem with ME2's squadmate missions is that they are so divorced from the main plot, that by the end of the game (if you're completionist) the Collectors are barely in the game. Shepard spends much more time sorting out personal problems for squadmates than preventing the imminent destruction of all sapient space-faring life. I'm also not sold on the loyalty mechanic. Why should Miranda meeting her sister determine whether she lives or dies?

 

Ideally a good number of those squadmate side missions, if they are in ME:A, would be tied into the main plot or connected to the game's antagonists. I'd also rather have loyalty or rivalry tied to how a character interacts with the protagonist, or determine whether or not they leave the crew, than having it tied to whether or not they die at the end of the game. 

 

I'm all for putting some squadmates into situations where they could be killed, I just don't think it should be determined by whether or not they've got their daddy issues sorted.

[Nomen Mendax]

I like the idea of side quests focused on your companion characters, but I'd hope the execution would be somewhat better than the squad mate missions in ME2.

 

The problem with ME2's squadmate missions is that they are so divorced from the main plot, that by the end of the game (if you're completionist) the Collectors are barely in the game. Shepard spends much more time sorting out personal problems for squadmates than preventing the imminent destruction of all sapient space-faring life. I'm also not sold on the loyalty mechanic. Why should Miranda meeting her sister determine whether she lives or dies?

 

Ideally a good number of those squadmate side missions, if they are in ME:A, would be tied into the main plot or connected to the game's antagonists. I'd also rather have loyalty or rivalry tied to how a character interacts with the protagonist, or determine whether or not they leave the crew, than having it tied to whether or not they die at the end of the game. 

 

I'm all for putting some squadmates into situations where they could be killed, I just don't think it should be determined by whether or not they've got their daddy issues sorted.

I agree with this to some extent. I've also pointed out a number of times the absurd situation that the one place your companions can't die in the suicide missions is in the actual combat. It unfortunately emphasizes that the main activity you perform in the game never has any impact on the plot.

[Drone223]

Loyalty missions in ME2 while neat came at the expense of the overall plot of the game to the point that was basically no story in ME2 what-so-ever. Loyalty mission can be added so long as they don't diminish the overall story.

[Abraham_uk]

I know I made fun of these missions in page one, but that was the whole point of Mass Effect 2.

Grab a rag tag crew of different commandos and then do favours for them to gain their loyalty.

 

However when it comes to loyalty, I'd rather gain the loyalty of a faction.

Kind of like what was done in Mass Effect 3. However I'd prefer the faction system of Fallout New Vegas.

Do favours for factions to gain their loyalty. Perhaps there are some perks to gaining the loyalty of a faction...

[Quarian Master Race]

Unfortunately, we can game the system and once you know the "correct" choices for the SM you can get through it without loss.

 

It also makes the choices themselves more interesting because there is no right answer. In Tali's mission I didn't even give a thought to handing the data over or not, I just took the Paragon option and yelled my way out of having to make a real choice.

 

However in Legion's mission? I stopped for a minute to actually think about it because there wasn't a "solve everything" button for me to press. It really was an extremely well designed mission, and I want to see more of it in ME:A.

The first statement and the next two are rather curiously paradoxical, considering that Legion's mission is much like the options in the SM in that it has an unequivocally "correct" choice despite not even having yell in red/blue as an option. Destroying the Heretics is the equal or superior choice in every way; you get the same war assets (they simply are on the quarian side rather than the geth) but it makes achieving a ceasefire much easier, and once you know that there is no reason to ever rewrite them apart from trying to farm Paragon points. IMO it's not a very well designed choice at all, a duality that has one choice with zero advantages over the other. IMO even Samara/Morinth is better because Morinth at least has the Dominate bonus power going for her if nothing else.

The only reason you didn't give a thought to handing over the data in Tali's mission was because of yelling in R/B options. Take those out, and the other 3 choices are an excellent example of cost/ benfit analysis. Allowing Tali to be exiled maintains her loyalty, but at the same time is disadvantageous to the political situation, because without her presence the Admiralty Board is stacked heavily against reconciliation with the geth, and it becomes much harder to achieve. Now, if you present the evidence, Tali gets crossed with you and you fail to get her loyalty (one of the few missions where you could actually lose someone's loyalty upon successful completion), but ultimately it is the pragmatic choice of the two, because she isn't exiled, still is promoted to Admiral and thus brokering the ceasefire with the geth is made much easier (provided you don't get her killed in the SM). Then there's the "rally the crowd" option. This can actually get you the same optimal result as either of the persuasions, but unlike with those you actually have to make the proper choices to build goodwill. If you sent Veetor off to be tortured by Cerberus or couldn't keep Kal'Reegar alive earlier in the game, they won't back you up and the attempt will fail.

The latter was actually great design ultimately trivialized by the persuasion mechanic, much like Zaeed's loyalty mission. The paragon option was idealistic in terms of personal loyalty but ultimately gets a worse result, complicates larger conflicts and could eventually bite you, the Renegade option was focused on the greater objective at the expense of a squadmate's personal feelings. There was an optimal solution, but it could only be achieved by making narrative choices instead of mindlessly choosing upper/ lower dialouge options at every opportunity to farm points for a contrived mechanic. 

[AlanC9]

The first statement and the next two are rather curiously paradoxical, considering that Legion's mission is much like the options in the SM in that it has an unequivocally "correct" choice despite not even having yell in red/blue as an option. Destroying the Heretics is the equal or superior choice in every way; you get the same war assets (they simply are on the quarian side rather than the geth) but it makes achieving a ceasefire much easier, and once you know that there is no reason to ever rewrite them apart from trying to farm Paragon points. IMO it's not a very well designed choice at all, a duality that has one choice with zero advantages over the other. IMO even Samara/Morinth is better because Morinth at least has the Dominate bonus power going for her if nothing else.

I don't see this as a very compelling objection. It was about time that a Paragon choice didn't automatically give you the best result, and I don't see the case for both sides of a choice always coming through with identical payoffs.

[AlanC9]

Now, if you present the evidence, Tali gets crossed with you and you fail to get her loyalty (one of the few missions where you could actually lose someone's loyalty upon successful completion), but ultimately it is the pragmatic choice of the two, because she isn't exiled, still is promoted to Admiral and thus brokering the ceasefire with the geth is made much easier (provided you don't get her killed in the SM).

Pragmatic if you're metagaming, that is. In the moment it's hard to come up with a case for defying Tali's wishes about the data. About the best I can come up with is that Shep's trying to discredit the pro-war forces.

[Quarian Master Race]

I don't see this as a very compelling objection. It was about time that a Paragon choice didn't automatically give you the best result, and I don't see the case for both sides of a choice always coming through with identical payoffs.

Paragon choices don't automatically give you the best outcome. The best outcome of Tuchanka in terms of assets is to sabotage with Wreav while saving Maelon's data. Similarly. The best outcome for Rannoch in terms of assets is to activate Legion, destroy the Heretics, keep Tali from being exiled(even if you have to hand over evidence), and support Xen and Gerrel in on ship arguments.

The issue with paragon choices has always been that they never backfire, unlike some renegade ones. Rewriting the Heretics is an example, since you can circumvent it by simply being Paragon enough and passing checks in other places. Meanwhile, a Renegade has no option to get geth and quarian support should they choose to sell Legion to Cerberus, even though something like controlling the geth by force would have been a thematically consistent outcome.

I never suggested that both sides should, merely that arguing against the persuasion mechanic because it enables unequivocal successes and then citing a conflict where one can reach unequivocal success with zero requirements period as an example of doing it right as being paradoxical. I don't have an issue with destroying the Heretics being the correct choice. In fact, I wish they'd have gone further and made rewrite backfire harder via making the ceasefire impossible for anyone who picked it, at least if they choose to continue making a similarly beneficial outcome impossible for a renegade who sells Legion.

[Quarian Master Race]

Pragmatic if you're metagaming, that is. In the moment it's hard to come up with a case for defying Tali's wishes about the data. About the best I can come up with is that Shep's trying to discredit the pro-war forces.

I'd agree that overall it unnecessarily divides the Fleet and gives Koris political ammunition, but you can also use the opportunity to voice support for Xen's position of studying the geth and thus using the research to further the pro-war cause.

Political clairvoyance aside, it doesn't take much thought to figure out that letting Tali get herself permanently exiled out of concern for her dead father is probably not a good idea if you think her presence is or will eventually be beneficial to the Fleet. I dont see merely gaining her loyalty/ not p!ssing her off as a good reason for doing so if you're looking at the big picture

Either way, that conflict would have been extremely interesting without the I win button in the P/R system.

[Dantriges]

Hm, let´s see which loyalty missions could be justified.

 

Tali got a court summons and a charge of treason is something serious. She is not enlisted or so, the only thing keeping her on board is personal loyalty. She could or she should have left after she got the message. So you either suck it up if you want to keep her or not. In that case it would be difficult for her to find you again after the trial if she gets a flight from the fleet at all.

 

Samara: Ah well, shore leave on Omega in sight of the relay. Ok. Halfway justified if you are a Spectre and supposed to go after stuff like this. Doesn´t take much time anyways.

 

Grunt: The only thing you know, it´s some medical condition and you don´t know what it is. So you can either drop the tankbaby off somewhere with all his belongings (his armor), ignore it and hope it´s not so serious or fly to Tuchanka. Kids. That´s what you get for adopting a krogan.

 

Mordin: Well if you are there. If I were Mordin I would be pissed off if Shep said "no time" and leaves Tuchanka.

 

Kasumi´s and Zaeed´s mission are part of their contract. They could simply leave for breach of contract. That´s what you get when your "boss" negotiates the employment deals. 

 

You could throw in Miranda´s mission if you are looking for Thane and Samara on Ilium. The only thing you know at the beginning is that she wants to talk to some contacts. And then you find out, that her sister gets "abducted." Hard to say no, when it´s only a few hours of your time.

 

Still leaves Garrus, Thane, Legion, Jacob and Jack at the not so loyal level.

 

So the only one who bites it, is Jack.  

 

But yeah 12 loyalty missions, don´t know how many sidequests and five main missions is a weird quest composition. Felt more like Mayhem through Terminus rather than Stop the Collectors. 

[Cyonan]

The first statement and the next two are rather curiously paradoxical, considering that Legion's mission is much like the options in the SM in that it has an unequivocally "correct" choice despite not even having yell in red/blue as an option. Destroying the Heretics is the equal or superior choice in every way; you get the same war assets (they simply are on the quarian side rather than the geth) but it makes achieving a ceasefire much easier, and once you know that there is no reason to ever rewrite them apart from trying to farm Paragon points. IMO it's not a very well designed choice at all, a duality that has one choice with zero advantages over the other. IMO even Samara/Morinth is better because Morinth at least has the Dominate bonus power going for her if nothing else.

The only reason you didn't give a thought to handing over the data in Tali's mission was because of yelling in R/B options. Take those out, and the other 3 choices are an excellent example of cost/ benfit analysis. Allowing Tali to be exiled maintains her loyalty, but at the same time is disadvantageous to the political situation, because without her presence the Admiralty Board is stacked heavily against reconciliation with the geth, and it becomes much harder to achieve. Now, if you present the evidence, Tali gets crossed with you and you fail to get her loyalty (one of the few missions where you could actually lose someone's loyalty upon successful completion), but ultimately it is the pragmatic choice of the two, because she isn't exiled, still is promoted to Admiral and thus brokering the ceasefire with the geth is made much easier (provided you don't get her killed in the SM). Then there's the "rally the crowd" option. This can actually get you the same optimal result as either of the persuasions, but unlike with those you actually have to make the proper choices to build goodwill. If you sent Veetor off to be tortured by Cerberus or couldn't keep Kal'Reegar alive earlier in the game, they won't back you up and the attempt will fail.

The latter was actually great design ultimately trivialized by the persuasion mechanic, much like Zaeed's loyalty mission. The paragon option was idealistic in terms of personal loyalty but ultimately gets a worse result, complicates larger conflicts and could eventually bite you, the Renegade option was focused on the greater objective at the expense of a squadmate's personal feelings. There was an optimal solution, but it could only be achieved by making narrative choices instead of mindlessly choosing upper/ lower dialouge options at every opportunity to farm points for a contrived mechanic. 

 

Well I already mentioned Mass Effect 3 never really handled that choice very well, and I never really had issues getting the ceasefire even with rewrite. Samara/Morinth was another good loyalty mission, though again ME3 handles it pretty poorly if you choose Morinth.

 

Tali's mission would be better if I had to choose between exile or show the data rather than being able to yell in R/B options. That's the whole point I was trying to make. The fact that those options exist kind of negates needing to make a choice between the 2 that you were presented with originally, because they're "fix everything" choices. Rally the crowd is an interesting way of providing a "Fix everything" button and tying it to having made some past choices.

 

The whole trivialization via persuasion mechanic is what I'm hoping they do less of in ME:A. It's not bad to use sometimes, but it felt a bit overused in Mass Effect.

[Dantriges]

Samara/Morinth?   One of them is a battle hardened justicar who´s already part of the team, the other a hunted criminal who kills during intercourse. Sure she could be useful if she were able to sleep with Harbinger without getting indoctrinated but for a (para)miltary operation? Never saw a reason to betray Samara just because her daughter made some vague promises.

[Nomen Mendax]

Samara/Morinth?   One of them is a battle hardened justicar who´s already part of the team, the other a hunted criminal who kills during intercourse. Sure she could be useful if she were able to sleep with Harbinger without getting indoctrinated but for a (para)miltary operation? Never saw a reason to betray Samara just because her daughter made some vague promise

I actually found the choice to have Morinth as a team member fairly offensive. I assume that Bioware were going with a vampire motif, which, if I recall correctly, was popular at the time. But given that she used her psychic abilities to "persuade" people to sleep with her she was arguably a rapist and definitely a serial killer. It made as much sense for you to be able to recruit Jacob's father.

[Dean_the_Young]

Paragon choices don't automatically give you the best outcome. The best outcome of Tuchanka in terms of assets is to sabotage with Wreav while saving Maelon's data. Similarly. The best outcome for Rannoch in terms of assets is to activate Legion, destroy the Heretics, keep Tali from being exiled(even if you have to hand over evidence), and support Xen and Gerrel in on ship arguments.

The issue with paragon choices has always been that they never backfire, unlike some renegade ones. Rewriting the Heretics is an example, since you can circumvent it by simply being Paragon enough and passing checks in other places. Meanwhile, a Renegade has no option to get geth and quarian support should they choose to sell Legion to Cerberus, even though something like controlling the geth by force would have been a thematically consistent outcome.

If Paragon choices never backfire, but Renengades occasionally do, then Paragon is consistently the 'best.' That we have to dig so hard and long to find a specific Tuchanka scenario to justify, on marginal war assets, a case of 'better' is more the exception that proves the rule.

 

Tuchanka can give a total renegade (and only a total Renegade- saving Wrex is treated as thematically Paragon despite it not being a P/R choice, you must choose to destroy Maleon's cure- you must choose to sabotage the genophage) gets you marginally more points and tempers a significantly worse context of 'evil Krogan.' By comparison... the Paragon loses nothing except for the points (which are negligable) and Mordin (who, let's be frank, is the more relevant consideration for what is 'best'). And even that assumes you don't do the other Renegade things- like, say, saving Wrex with a Renegade persuade.

 

Similarly, the narrative flow from Rannoch isn't evaluated by war points alone. The themes and general ethics and available content emphasize Geth-Quarian peace as 'best'. The player gets content (from having Legion). The player gets a more positive tone (people are happy). The player avoids ethically unpleasant consequences (genocide). The points might be slightly inferior- but again, the points are trivial excess when other sources are more than sufficient.

[N7Jamaican]

I would love for loyalty missions.