367 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

So did anyone ever complain about those deaths of Kaiden/Ashley?

 

I remember for Dragon Age II there were complaints over the deaths of Hawkes siblings. Curious to see if that is a reason for not making a mandatory sacrifice.

 

There were complaints for Kaiden/Ashley, but ultimately it was muted because the forums moved on to ME2.

 

But yeah- it basically revolved around 'why can't we save both?' after discovering the initial audio lines indicating that it was a planned possibility at one point.

 

However, since it was a player choice decision- rather than forced on the player- and the player could choose whichever of the two they liked more, it never reached the Bethany/Carver levels, where you could be stuck with a companion you disliked because of something like character class.

[LinksOcarina]

There were complaints for Kaiden/Ashley, but ultimately it was muted because the forums moved on to ME2.

 

But yeah- it basically revolved around 'why can't we save both?' after discovering the initial audio lines indicating that it was a planned possibility at one point.

 

However, since it was a player choice decision- rather than forced on the player- and the player could choose whichever of the two they liked more, it never reached the Bethany/Carver levels, where you could be stuck with a companion you disliked because of something like character class.

 

I never fully buyed the complaints over Bethany/Carver in the end.

 

Not to mention the choice at the end of act one is pretty significant in that way for their character development.

[JeffZero]

I'm so glad both can't be saved re: Kaidan/Ashley. I love stories with real loss. That decision -- and how it paints various aspects in the sequels (mainly 3) -- is one of my favorite things.

[AlanC9]

My main problem was the second time Shepard gets the choice between the squadmates. The bomb is obviously more important. Fortunately, Saren inexplicably forgets this, and goes wherever Shepard goes.

[Iakus]

I'm so glad both can't be saved re: Kaidan/Ashley. I love stories with real loss. That decision -- and how it paints various aspects in the sequels (mainly 3) -- is one of my favorite things.

I don't like the fact that because it puts the characters in effectively a quantum state, they end up being pushed aside for the next two games, and in some cases acting like clones of each other.

[JeffZero]

That's a perfectly reasonable critique. For me it's totally worth it, but I understand.

[Mathias]

I don't like the fact that because it puts the characters in effectively a quantum state, they end up being pushed aside for the next two games, and in some cases acting like clones of each other.

 

I love the Virmire Choice. But perhaps it was a choice that was best saved for the last game. Originally Illium was suppose to be Virmire 2.0, where one of your party members would die. Why they cut this, I have no idea but I wish they didn't. 

[JeffZero]

Yeah, I would have loved that.

[AlanC9]

I don't like the fact that because it puts the characters in effectively a quantum state, they end up being pushed aside for the next two games, and in some cases acting like clones of each other.

Hmm... I'm not sure if this means that choices involving squadmates are a problem , or that the trilogy structure itself is a problem.

[Dean_the_Young]

Hmm... I'm not sure if this means that choices involving squadmates are a problem , or that the trilogy structure itself is a problem.

 

I think it's more of 'choices to kill a squadmate.' When death is optional... the plot has to be designed on the assumption that it occurs, even if it hasn't.

 

Death choices need to be stepped down a bit- there are plenty of other delimmas and branches that are less extreme and easier to reflect while moving a character forward- or there needs to be an inevitable break between the PC and the NPC regardless/as a consequence.

 

In SWTOR's Trooper Story, there's a NPC named SGT Jaxo (IIRC). She's a major supporting NPC/flirtatious love interest. There's a point later on where she's stuck on a station about to blow in a delimma of 'save her or save numerous other POWS.' She begs you to save her, afraid to die. If you don't, then she dies- but if you do, she's so distraught and haunted by guilt that she breaks up with you regardless.

 

I don't necessarily think that's the strongest of writings- I suspect that, were it a Companion, a lot of players would feel betrayed and meta-game/rationalize letting her die to save the many- but that's an example of how a character death choice can be managed.

 

 

Personally, I'd rather more choices like Garrus's ME1 development, where you push them this way or that ideologically- and then follow those choices. Let ME2 Garrus be at Omega as either an undercover C-SEC cop, or a Spectre. Let Garrus adopt approving/disapproving tones of choices based on his P/R slant, rather than make him the always supportive buddy.
 

Mordin's Loyalty Mission was also a good example of a choice that had important character implications further down the line- even pushing off whether it affected his survival or not, rather than cast it in those terms.

 

 

My personal ideal standard for choices is that they be less about divergence, and more about approaching the same things later on from different angles. Given Bioware's structure, divergence is never going to be a reality- so having mutually exclusive choices that have to be either watered down and equivicated, or simply run away from, really just undermines the premise. Might as well go in a similar path from the start, with a tone change by design rather than de facto reality.

 

My favorite Bioware choices, at least in concept, have been DA2's ending and the Mage/Templar recruitment choice in DAI. Both choices lead to pretty much the same things- but by changing the tone, and only minor gameplay changes, you change the meaning and impression of those things. Hawke as the symbol of the Kirkwall Annullment- it wasn't carried forward to my satisfaction, but being the hero of one side or the other of a war that was already going on had potential! Likewise, the difference in Red Templars/Venatori gave more feeling for the DAI epilogue slides, which suggested different (but similar) ending states for the post-Inquisition power structure. Whether the Templars remained, or were folded into the Inquistion, or became a new organization... the same functions existed politically, but name changes suggested a distinction larger than was.

 

That, in my mind, is better than making a major distinction from the start, and then walking back on it.

[Han Shot First]

So did anyone ever complain about those deaths of Kaiden/Ashley?

 

I remember for Dragon Age II there were complaints over the deaths of Hawkes siblings. Curious to see if that is a reason for not making a mandatory sacrifice.

 

There were a few complaints. Some people complained that there wasn't an option to save both of them. I wouldn't say they were anything close to a majority however, and on the whole it seemed like Virmire was one of the fans' favorite missions in the game. It may have even been *the* fan favorite. The two I remember people raving about most were Virmire and Ilos.

 

JeffZero, on 27 Sept 2015 - 1:03 PM, said:
I'm so glad both can't be saved re: Kaidan/Ashley. I love stories with real loss. That decision -- and how it paints various aspects in the sequels (mainly 3) -- is one of my favorite things.

 

I agree fully with this. The decision by the devs to change up their original plans for Virmire and remove the option to save both of them was the right one. Virmire would have been much less emotionally impactful if casualties only occurred if Shepard blundered. As much as I liked Mass Effect 2, I thought it could have been an even better game had the Suicide Mission not given the player the option to save everyone. 

[themikefest]

The leaked script had a choice to save T'soni or Ashley/Kaidan in ME3. Too bad that wasn't in the game

[dreamgazer]

The leaked script had a choice to save T'soni or Ashley/Kaidan in ME3. Too bad that wasn't in the game

Considering the fact that it gave Kai Leng even more power in the narrative, I'm glad it was cut.

Bet the audience would've just loved choosing between them, too.

[dreamgazer]

I love the Virmire Choice. But perhaps it was a choice that was best saved for the last game. Originally Illium was suppose to be Virmire 2.0, where one of your party members would die. Why they cut this, I have no idea but I wish they didn't.

The fanbase moaned about ME3 being too "grimdark", and you think including this forced-death choice would've been a good idea?

[themikefest]

Considering the fact that it gave Kai Leng even more power in the narrative, I'm glad it was cut.

Bet the audience would've just loved choosing between them, too.

I would've liked to have it in the game

[Han Shot First]

I would've liked to have it in the game

 

I would have liked something similar in the end run. I'd have loved if the game concluded with a ME2 style suicide mission without the ability to save everyone on the team.

[dreamgazer]

I would've liked to have it in the game

I know. Pretty sure I know why, too.

[dreamgazer]

I would have liked something similar in the end run. I'd have loved if the game concluded with a ME2 style suicide mission without the ability to save everyone on the team.

That's pretty different, though. I wouldn't mind seeing something similar to SM mechanics in the last push, but based on something more tangible (and smarter) than loyalty.

[themikefest]

I would have liked something similar in the end run. I'd have loved if the game concluded with a ME2 style suicide mission without the ability to save everyone on the team.

There was a suicide mission in ME3. The beam run. Remember everyone decided to run straight while Harbinger vaporizes everyone. No one wanted to get to cover or at least make any effort to avoid the beam. So yeah, there was a suicide mission in ME3. If ems is below 2000, the squadmates get to join  them by being killed by Harbinger

[Ahglock]

My main problem was the second time Shepard gets the choice between the squadmates. The bomb is obviously more important. Fortunately, Saren inexplicably forgets this, and goes wherever Shepard goes.

 

I kind of assumed he just didn't know about he bomb.  He knew you were up to something, but what wasn't fully known.  So he went to you, figuring the main strike would be revolving around you.

[Iakus]

Hmm... I'm not sure if this means that choices involving squadmates are a problem , or that the trilogy structure itself is a problem.

Either, both? It'seems certainly not restricted to trilogies. Look at the sibling in DA2. One dies in the prologue and the other can die in the first act, they spend most of the rest of the game conspicuously absent even if they live.

[themikefest]

Either, both? It'seems certainly not restricted to trilogies. Look at the sibling in DA2. One dies in the prologue and the other can die in the first act, they spend most of the rest of the game conspicuously absent even if they live.

Meredith can kill Bethany in the final Act

[Oni Changas]

[blahblah]

Kotor is also not a well-written game at times, and TOR is also very hit or miss. I don't know, Drew K has a mixed record for me, yet people give Mac Walters a ton of **** for less if you ask me. 

Barring the many botches of ME3, Mac created the Cerberus nutriding and the comics that really ****ed up the continuity.

 

Personally I'm glad he's back to some extent. While I won't get my hopes up that he'll write some ME stories again (games), it'd be nice to see him rejoin the writing team to work on Andromeda or at least as a consultant. I like his writing style and attention to detail and hope to see guys like Chris E. (wrote Legion in ME2) return. People with original ideas or concepts for the characters/species that either subverted or avoided tropes altogether.

[Oni Changas]

The fanbase moaned about ME3 being too "grimdark", and you think including this forced-death choice would've been a good idea?

I wouldn't mind if everyone went out like a boss and the series ended by planting seeds for future characters like Matriarch Liara, Old Man Grunt, Shep having a child, James following in Shep and Anderson's footsteps, a Grissom student taking Jack's reigns, etc. If you had control over say, Garrus with his own turian squad defending Shepard's run with their lives or Kaidan/Ash making a last stand to get Shepard to the center of the Citadel or something with weight that also has a respect for each character's contribution. Ever played RDR or that HALO prequel that had the team that protected Master Chief? Would have been cool. It wasn't grimdark cause people died. It was grimdark cause people died and there was little or nothing to look forward to.

[Dean_the_Young]

The fanbase moaned about ME3 being too "grimdark", and you think including this forced-death choice would've been a good idea?

 

Actually, there's a case for it: one of the issues behind the complaints and the ending was that it was jarring in the context of the rest of the story- that the ending stands out in contrast so much because, on the Perfect Paragon route, Shepard routinely avoids or escapes negative consequences. Mordin's a loss, sure, but not a defeat- a heroic sacrifice, rather than a moment of failure, which was the point of Thesia. And that was early in the game, after which Shepard goes from one victory.

 

A forced-death choice could have helped innoculate the player to the lack of an ideal option of the ending. When you can avoid negative consequences entirely, they always seem like fail states, but the Virmire situation helped set up the finale of ME1 and it's unavoidable casualties delimma by establishing the threat of the enemy in advance. The same could apply here- which, in turn, would put the players in the right mindset for the finale and the prospect of losing Shepard.

 

Now, it'd require Kai Leng to be handled better- far from a guarantee- but it could.