157 réponses à ce sujet

[ACika011]

The thing i like the most with the Mass Effect series is that i feel like im in a interactive movie im making, where i can make choices that will greatly impact the end of the game im playing. Im Mass Effect 1 that would be the Ash/Kaidan scenario where i had to choose between them. In Mass Effect 2 that would be Talis and Legions loyalty missions that had a big impact in ME3 or any other loyalty mission because they all had some sort of impact in ME3. In ME3 that would be the whole Krogan genophage cure situation where we could single handedly influence the destiny of a entire race.

 

But i feel like they all had a bad and a good choice. In ME2 if you make the decision to destroy the heretics in Legions mission it would be a bad choice to kill the Quarians, if you decided to rewrite them it would be a bad choice to destroy the Geth. In Mass Effect 3 if you decide not to cure the genophage and Wrex is still alive thats a bad choice because well you loose Krogan support  and have to kill 2 of your close friends and either way you would receive Salarian help after the Cerberus attack on the Citadel.

 

Deciding between Ash and Kaiden was the only choice in the entire series where you were put in a loose/loose situation. If you save Ashley your friend dies. If you save Kaidan your friend dies. A similar situation erupted in the Telltale game "The Walking Dead", if i remember correctly in the second game you had to choose between 2 friends that helped you but they were on opposite sides of a river and you couldn't save them both. I think this is very important because it reminds us that we are in a war and that no matter how hard we try we can't save everybody.

 

I hope that there were more situation like the ones mention above in Andromeda because hard decision and losing characters we really like impacts us emotionally in real life. When we look at a very popular tv series Game of Thrones we would notice that characters die a lot and thats one of the reasons its so popular. I know in my personal experience i was really sad at end of season 5 because a character dies that in my opinion was a nice guy always trying to help other people and who frankly didn't deserve it.

 

Some great opportunities were missed in ME3, we were a character that was fighting against time and all odds to help his people and the entire galaxy knowing that every moment a life is lost and that we can't help everybody. I didn't get that feel when playing the game.

 

Curing the genophage was a great example. Deciding to cure it would give us Krogan and later Salarian help while if we didn't cure it we would only gain Salarian help and some scattered Krogan help and we would be loosing 2 good friends. We should have been in a middle of that problem and had to make a hard choice between the two of them and maybe the Salarians would provide more help both in terms of military or scientists than the Krogan but it would be hard for your character to make that decision. After the mission if we decided not to cure it we would have been in a dream sequence where we see a old Wrex holding a dead Krogan baby or if we cure it we see dead people on Earth because we didn't get the most out of it.

 

Another example is the mission on Thessia. It would have been fantastic if we were put in a scenario similar to the one in Mass Effect where we had to choose between Ashley and Kaidan. Maybe we had to choose between Liara and our other squad member which in my case was Garrus and that would have been a really super hard choice for me because they are my favourite characters. If we decided for example to save Liara we would get a cut scene where Kai Leng is stabbing Garrus in the stomach while he is looking at you, its extreme but it sure would be memorable and make us hate Cerberus and Kai Leng even more.

 

So to sum it up i hope we have to make hard decision that would impact us in real life and make us remember that we are a soldier and hard decision have to be made and life would be lost no matter what we do.

 

I apologize for any spelling or grammar mistakes, english isn't my first language.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I agree, there were good and bad choices. However, when you consider the war assets, and added the DLC, there were few consequences to your actions. If you rewrote the heretics and chose the Quarians, those war assets were easily made up by Aria or Leviathan. The same if you chose to destroy the heretics and chose the geth.

 

The Salarian help was pretty inconsequential. 

 

In Game of Thrones, idealism and honor blinds the Starks to treachery of men, and it's almost comical how they continually walk into traps. If Snow had a brain, he should have left the Night's Watch and gone with the Wildlings. Instead he tried to hold the watch together, failing to learn that the solution to dealing with ones enemies in that world is to kill them otherwise they will kill you. Sansa would probably be better off killing herself. 

 

Originally IIRC we were to have a decision of saving Liara or someone else in the temple but it was cut. 

[ACika011]

I agree, there were good and bad choices. However, when you consider the war assets, and added the DLC, there were few consequences to your actions. If you rewrote the heretics and chose the Quarians, those war assets were easily made up by Aria or Leviathan. The same if you chose to destroy the heretics and chose the geth.

 

The Salarian help was pretty inconsequential. 

 

In Game of Thrones, idealism and honor blinds the Starks to treachery of men, and it's almost comical how they continually walk into traps. If Snow had a brain, he should have left the Night's Watch and gone with the Wildlings. Instead he tried to hold the watch together, failing to learn that the solution to dealing with ones enemies in that world is to kill them otherwise they will kill you. Sansa would probably be better off killing herself. 

 

Originally IIRC we were to have a decision of saving Liara or someone else in the temple but it was cut. 

Im not saying that there are no consequences, obviously with high war assets your squad mates survive and you get the breathing scene at the end if you choose the destroy ending. You made a example with the Quarian Geth situation and i think that proves my point, like you mentioned the 400 war assets and 150 you get from Aria make that decision irrelevant to the war effort and thats the problem.

[Laughing_Man]

Originally IIRC we were to have a decision of saving Liara or someone else in the temple but it was cut. 

 

Really? Interesting. Maybe something like this would have made Kai Lame darker, less goofy and idiotic. Nah, who am I kidding...

 

At the very lest it would have given Shepard a better reason for the angst after the mission.

[Laughing_Man]

The "hard" decisions in ME rarely led to meaningful changes, at least not in the game itself.

[ACika011]

Really? Interesting. Maybe something like this would have made Kai Lame darker, less goofy and idiotic. Nah, who am I kidding...

 

At the very lest it would have given Shepard a better reason for the angst after the mission.

Actually as i understood when looking at the art books the final battle of ME3 should have taken place at the Illusive man's base where he turns in to some sort of a creature similar to what happened to Saren at the end of ME1.

[Killroy]

I would like fewer "outs" for the tough decisions. In ME1 it was either Ashley or Kaidan, not both. Save the Council or focus your efforts on the Reaper, not both. But after ME1 you always had outs, making the hard decisions easy.

Quarians or Geth? Why not both!

Not everyone will survive this suicide mission. But actually they pretty much always all survive! 

If you cure the genophage the Krogan might become a massive threat to the galaxy. Unless they don't, because Wrex is 2cool4you!

 

The premise of "hard choices" shouldn't have workarounds.

[wright1978]

Virmire choice was very powerful.
Also found the possible deaths during suicide mission powerful. I think something more nuanced like this(but without the margin to get everyone out alive) works better than a simple straight up choice of two squaddies.

[ZipZap2000]

Not so much hard choices as the feeling of knowing at the time your words or your decision will have future consequences.

That's what I liked about the Heretic mission was the split second before you pick either way. I made the wrong choice and it had an impact.

Tali and Legion both died.

Which was hard to watch but ultimately satisfying a similar circumstance would be breaking it off with Miranda. With Jack its almost inconsequential but Miranda dies.

Similar again with Mordins loyalty mission and the data. Eve dies.

The consequences seem repetitive and generic but the reasons for them aren't a bit more diversity among the consequences would be great. Maybe not kill someone off every time?.

[ArcadiaGrey]

I love the tough decisions, but I'd want fewer of them that have better repercussions.

 

Many of the choices don't really add up to much difference in game.  They end up being in the epilogue, or the codex, or surmount to a ship in the background during the final assault.  DA:O is a classic example of this.  Make a huge decision, like who will be the King of Orzammar, then leave straight away and never see the world move on, never experience what happens next.  At least DA:I let you see some consequences like Samson or Calpernia, hopefully that's a step in the right direction, but even that didn't reference a whole bunch of stuff from previous games.

 

Even Kaidan/Ashley isn't particularly interesting.  Neither do much in ME2 or 3, follow the exact same path in ME3, can both be recruited, can both be shot, and can both be romanced.  They're mirror images of each other and neither actually contributes much to the storyline.

 

Let's cure the genophage, or not.  The scenes will be almost the same either way and them bam, we're leaving to do something else and you didn't see much of it play out.  Even an alive Mordin will immediately disappear, how cool would it be if he stuck around?

 

So yes to tough decisions, absolutely, but let's make them count.  I know there are limitations, but I think they absolutely could reference them further down the line with a mission going 2 parallel ways depending on what you did earlier.  Why not block a resolution to a quest because you did something earlier to cancel it out?

 

EDIT - I'd also like those differences to be reflected in missions, not just crew mates being alive or dead.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The Virmire choice was ridiculous. There were many ways you could have been able to save both Ashley and Kaidan, but you don't get to do any of those because drama. Bioware even had it at one point where you could, but then cut it out. 

[ACika011]

The Virmire choice was ridiculous. There were many ways you could have been able to save both Ashley and Kaidan, but you don't get to do any of those because drama. Bioware even had it at one point where you could, but then cut it out. 

To be honest in real combat situation 10-15 minutes of combat can be the difference between life and death. If you were being overwhelmed by robots with guns i doubt you would be able to survive for too long.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

To be honest in real combat situation 10-15 minutes of combat can be the difference between life and death. If you were being overwhelmed by robots with guns i doubt you would be able to survive for too long.

If you just did idiotic things, sure. But if you think logically, which you always should but especially for a mission of that importance, then you would be able to plan or adapt and survive. But instead everyone is handed the Idiot Ball and do nothing just to add a bit of drama. The reinforcements were one Geth dropship's worth of Geth, and not even strong units like Armatures or Primes but just regular Geth Troopers and Geth Shock Troopers, an amount we have killed multiple times before and after without incident. It was stupid, and at one point Bioware knew it since they had a 'save both' option, but for some dumb reason decided to cut it. 

[ACika011]

If you just did idiotic things, sure. But if you think logically, which you always should but especially for a mission of that importance, then you would be able to plan or adapt and survive. But instead everyone is handed the Idiot Ball and do nothing just to add a bit of drama. It was stupid, and at one point Bioware knew it since they had a 'save both' option, but for some dumb reason decided to cut it. 

Would you like me to give you a link to a real combat situation in Syria where 10 isis fighters are assaulting a SAA bunker just to show you how long it takes to overrun somebody in a very short time span?

 

Can you explain what does it mean to "do idiotic thing" when assaulting a enemy base while encountering heavy resistance from fortified positions. What should have they done to avoid being killed?

[wright1978]

To be honest in real combat situation 10-15 minutes of combat can be the difference between life and death. If you were being overwhelmed by robots with guns i doubt you would be able to survive for too long.

Yeah seemed reasonable to me. Suppose they could simply have cut out the games aspect of having choice and killed whichever one you sent with the salarians. Glad they decided against having a save both scenario. Showed shep is human as there will always be situations where you have to suffer the consequences of not being able to save everyone.

[Killroy]

If you just did idiotic things, sure. But if you think logically, which you always should but especially for a mission of that importance, then you would be able to plan or adapt and survive. But instead everyone is handed the Idiot Ball and do nothing just to add a bit of drama. The reinforcements were one Geth dropship's worth of Geth, and not even strong units like Armatures or Primes but just regular Geth Troopers and Geth Shock Troopers, an amount we have killed multiple times before and after without incident. It was stupid, and at one point Bioware knew it since they had a 'save both' option, but for some dumb reason decided to cut it. 

 

You could make this argument about any dramatic moment in anything ever. Why didn't Han Solo think his son might kill him even though he'd already killed dozens of young children? Why didn't J.J. Gittes just kill Noah Cross instead of trying to take him down without any hard evidence? 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Would you like me to give you a link to a real combat situation in Syria where 10 isis fighters are assaulting a SAA bunker just to show you how long it takes to overrun somebody in a very short time span?

 

Can you explain what does it mean to "do idiotic thing" when assaulting a enemy base while encountering heavy resistance from fortified positions. What should have they done to avoid being killed?

Except the Geth reinforcements weren't in fortified positions. They were dropped in the middle of a kill box. The people staying with the bomb were the ones who could have been in fortified positions, but like idiots they stand in the middle of the killbox as well with no cover. Stuff like that is what I mean when I say they did idiotic things, when they go "We have places to take cover and be able to hold out until reinforcements arrive, but let's not use them and instead stand here completely exposed."

 

Yeah seemed reasonable to me. Suppose they could simply have cut out the games aspect of having choice and killed whichever one you sent with the salarians. Glad they decided against having a save both scenario. Showed shep is human as there will always be situations where you have to suffer the consequences of not being able to save everyone.

Showed Shepard and Co. were imbeciles and took any emotional impact out of the scene, making the entire thing laughably ironic. 

[themikefest]

To be honest in real combat situation 10-15 minutes of combat can be the difference between life and death. If you were being overwhelmed by robots with guns i doubt you would be able to survive for too long.

In a real life combat situation, 1 second can make a difference.

[NKnight7]

The ME trilogy had some great choices and tough decisions to make, but sometimes it felt like your choices didn't have a whole lot of consequences or repercussions to them. I'd really like to see Andromeda have some tough decisions that really make you think before deciding, and then have better consequences/repercussions that you have to deal with.

[In Exile]

You could make this argument about any dramatic moment in anything ever. Why didn't Han Solo think his son might kill him even though he'd already killed dozens of young children? Why didn't J.J. Gittes just kill Noah Cross instead of trying to take him down without any hard evidence? 

 

But "look, mooks!" is not drama that works in games. Because we are such gods of slaughter that a "too many enemies, we'll die" choice never feels convincing. It's the same with losing via cut-scene - it feels forced, because we're only losing because by writer fiat. Movies don't struggle with the same issue because they usually set up their losses well. 

[Killroy]

But "look, mooks!" is not drama that works in games. Because we are such gods of slaughter that a "too many enemies, we'll die" choice never feels convincing. It's the same with losing via cut-scene - it feels forced, because we're only losing because by writer fiat. Movies don't struggle with the same issue because they usually set up their losses well. 

 

But that wasn't the situation on Virmire. One squadmate was pinned down in a bad position, incapable of getting away on their own.

[Gothfather]

I would like fewer "outs" for the tough decisions. In ME1 it was either Ashley or Kaidan, not both. Save the Council or focus your efforts on the Reaper, not both. But after ME1 you always had outs, making the hard decisions easy.

Quarians or Geth? Why not both!

Not everyone will survive this suicide mission. But actually they pretty much always all survive! 

If you cure the genophage the Krogan might become a massive threat to the galaxy. Unless they don't, because Wrex is 2cool4you!

 

The premise of "hard choices" shouldn't have workarounds.

 

 

I love the tough decisions, but I'd want fewer of them that have better repercussions.

 

Many of the choices don't really add up to much difference in game.  They end up being in the epilogue, or the codex, or surmount to a ship in the background during the final assault.  DA:O is a classic example of this.  Make a huge decision, like who will be the King of Orzammar, then leave straight away and never see the world move on, never experience what happens next.  At least DA:I let you see some consequences like Samson or Calpernia, hopefully that's a step in the right direction, but even that didn't reference a whole bunch of stuff from previous games.

 

Even Kaidan/Ashley isn't particularly interesting.  Neither do much in ME2 or 3, follow the exact same path in ME3, can both be recruited, can both be shot, and can both be romanced.  They're mirror images of each other and neither actually contributes much to the storyline.

 

Let's cure the genophage, or not.  The scenes will be almost the same either way and them bam, we're leaving to do something else and you didn't see much of it play out.  Even an alive Mordin will immediately disappear, how cool would it be if he stuck around?

 

So yes to tough decisions, absolutely, but let's make them count.  I know there are limitations, but I think they absolutely could reference them further down the line with a mission going 2 parallel ways depending on what you did earlier.  Why not block a resolution to a quest because you did something earlier to cancel it out?

 

EDIT - I'd also like those differences to be reflected in missions, not just crew mates being alive or dead.

 

I think these two post show what we can best learn from the ME trilogy. Bioware did a great experiment with trying to bring consequence of choice from one game to the next yet it become unwieldy and honestly impossible to deliver upon with an interactive media. I want no "I win" button for tough choices it is the reason I believe the paragon/Renegade morality system is so polarizing with gamers. I don't see to much of this in other binary moral systems in other games and no one even questions it in Kotor. I believe the ability to magically make tough choices trivial is the reason it is widely hated.

 

I also think we need to limit impactful choice as in choice that is carried over to future ME games to one or two instances and make these workable. So that you don't have to redo the "world." In ME1 you have the the virmire consequence which I think I viable and the save the council as an example of not viable. It becomes not viable because you have to jump through hoops to explain why the citadel is the same if you save the council vs if you don't. In one humans dominate because the loss of the council made them weaker and with a strong human presence humanity can force its way into power. Thus it explains why humans are running c-sec now and aliens resent this. When you save the council you don't kill Sovereign as fast so he does more damage to c-sec and now humans have to step in and fill the gap and this caused resentment. Why is this done like this? Because it is too expensive to write two version over every interaction on the citadel in the next two games.

 

We need to reduce our expectations on exactly how divergent the game can reasonably go but at the same time let us make individual in game choices more difficult. When we have a choice between two bad options like mind control vs genocide let us not equate one with being the "good" guy and the "other" the bad guy. Both of those actions should have given Shepard renegade points based on what gave renegade points in the past.

 

I want consequence of choice but i don't want always to be given a "moral" choice with consequence. Sometimes you make innocuous choices that have significant ramifications and the choice isn't a moral one. We need to stop this idea that if we are just good enough, just skilled enough and just smart enough we can control the outcome such that we always get the perfect happy ending. Keep this type of gaming to teen rated products. Give me a real and "mature" understanding of the world in my mature titles please. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

But that wasn't the situation on Virmire. One squadmate was pinned down in a bad position, incapable of getting away on their own.

By mooks. And not even strong mooks. So it was that situation, at least for the ones staying behind with the bomb. 

[WarGriffin]

Here is the Irony of HARD choices

 

 

They're great for the Narrative in the short term and letting the player feel they have some form of control over the story -IE they are building the story instead of experiencing it... 

 

However they are terrible for a long term story where you need to keep up with the consequences for a while.

 

The ME trilogies biggest flaw is that The major choices didn't have drastic outcomes cause they couldn't even if said outcomes would have effectively changed the set up.

 

Hence why you have so much railroading and branch cutting in ME3 or trivializing so you get the same result in ME2

 

 

If There must be a choice fine... but it clearly cannot be something that would completely change the story unless the Staff is willing to commit to to divergent plot lines that ensure.

 

 

Frankly I don't want any more Squadmate's live or die choices

 

The Citadel DLC with the entire group together made me realizie how alone and empty the squad feels when you go on the Murder everybody route.

[ACika011]

Except the Geth reinforcements weren't in fortified positions. They were dropped in the middle of a kill box. The people staying with the bomb were the ones who could have been in fortified positions, but like idiots they stand in the middle of the killbox as well with no cover. Stuff like that is what I mean when I say they did idiotic things, when they go "We have places to take cover and be able to hold out until reinforcements arrive, but let's not use them and instead stand here completely exposed."

Im not sure you remember that part correctly. In my playthrough Kaidan was with the Salarians who were supposed to make a distraction while the other team infiltrates the facility and plants the bomb. Kaidan and the Salarians had no other choice but to do a frontal assault in to position that were fortified. They managed to break trough but they sustained heavy loses. You for one said that they could have made a killbox and killed the assaulting Geth, but the Geth were doing the same thing to them, assaulting enemy positions that were made to support each other and had kill boxes of their own and yet they managed to break trough.

 

Dont think that because Rambo can kill endless waves of enemies everybody can.