238 réponses à ce sujet

[Killroy]

Can you imagine if your romance died at the end, no matter what? The thought of it, and the reaction it would cause is hilarious to me.

[ZipZap2000]

Can you imagine if your romance died at the end, no matter what? The thought of it, and the reaction it would cause is hilarious to me.

Not as good as having her/him kill the protagonist in the final moments of the game.

[Dalinne]

Can you imagine if your romance died at the end, no matter what? The thought of it, and the reaction it would cause is hilarious to me.

 

That's a tragic romance, but there are other things worse. Blowing up the chantry or being a ElvenGodofDestruction way worse.

[Killroy]

That's a tragic romance, but there are other things worse. Blowing up the chantry or being a ElvenGodofDestruction way worse.

To the BioWare fanbase? Not even close. It would cause a bigger uproar than the ME3 ending if every player's LI died no matter what.

[Lady Artifice]

Yea, with stipulations. 

 

I didn't appreciate the way Thane's death was handled, and I'm iffy about Virmire, both of which seemed a little clumsily implemented to me. 

 

I think Mordin's death on Tuchanka was perfectly done, though. It was avoidable, but only if certain parameters were met. And when it comes down to it, I can't think of a better way they could have ended that character's story arc. 

[SKAR]

I'd rather have it player's consequence. Adds realism and it's an RPG after all. I would also like to see squadmates disagree or agree on certain decisions you make. We have a right to choose.

[ZipZap2000]

I think everyone should die at the end. It should be unavoidable and entirely gratuitous, with no connection to the events that have occurred up to that point. Oh, and it should be presented via a slideshow epiloque with a half-assed narration from a random intern who couldn't care less.

For instance:

Spoiler

This is high quality writing, people.

What in the hell was that supposed to be.

[SKAR]

I think everyone should die at the end. It should be unavoidable and entirely gratuitous, with no connection to the events that have occurred up to that point. Oh, and it should be presented via a slideshow epiloque with a half-assed narration from a random intern who couldn't care less.

For instance:

Spoiler

This is high quality writing, people.

you always expect the worst.

[Cyonan]

Can you imagine if your romance died at the end, no matter what? The thought of it, and the reaction it would cause is hilarious to me.

 

They should make you have to choose between your romance and yourself dying, without some cheapskate third "bang Morrigan to get away without issue" card.

[Malanek]

I don't think it should be overused but I think squadmates dying adds to the drama. I don't think there should be an import function for the following game, so there is no problem there.

[Remix-General Aetius]

Through consequence from player choice like in Suicide Mission, YES.

 

Unavoidable deaths, NO. I've had enough of that.

[Gothfather]

I feel that if we engage in combat on a regular basis we should not be able to side step casualties. There should be unavoidable casualties in the game. We shouldn't sugar coat combat in a MATURE RPG.

 

Players have this idea that they should go through a mature title with unicorns and rainbows protecting them. This isn't about being "dark and gritty" it is about the consequences of choosing armed conflict to solve a problem. yes sometimes it is vital that we do so but it ALWAYS comes with consequences and a mature title should explore this. And these casualties shouldn't be limited to some insignificant background character, it should be someone that is CURRENTLY in our crew and someone we can actually grow to like. (You may not like any given character so you might not like one that dies but the potential should be there. The casualties should NOT be limited to past crew or a Jenkins casualty. Having the discussion with the doctor about Jenkins was fraking pointless in ME2 because who the frak cares about a character that have a dozen lines and dies in the first 2 minutes of the game? There was no impact, no thought provoking moment it was "what? oh he's dead that was fast. What was his name again?"

 

I also don't think all deaths in battle should be some heroic gesture either sometimes death is not some epic choice of saving a council member or curing a race from the genophage. Sometimes your squad mates die just doing their duty.

[Onewomanarmy]

I would like it if they could die but it shouldn't be forced or absolute. They should be able to die if I make certain choices.

[Gileadan]

Casualties should depend more on gameplay performance and less on "choices" and pretty much never on forced drama.

Every time a squadmate goes down in combat, increase that character's hidden death counter by 1. When it hits a certain number, they die permanently. Make that number persist through saves.

That way, you earn everyone's life, or cause their death, every time you step on the battlefield. If everyone lives in the end, you did a great job and deserve the good ending.

[fraggle]

I'm definitely for killable squadmates, and I say that as a person who, a little over a year ago, did not even want to kill off squadmates on purpose I also don't mind unavoidable deaths, when there's a good reason for it (I thought it was a good consequence that Thane dies in ME3; the way they did it might have been improved ).

 

If we get a standalone game, this should be easy to pull off. I really loved the Suicide Mission, and yes, I even liked some parts in ME3 better due to certain squadmates being dead, like Grissom without Jack (and I love this girl, so...) or the Rachni mission with Dagg. For the time the devs had, they did a great job imo (the amount of dialogue variety is damn amazing!) and they have learned a great deal from this.

And the Tuchanka outcome with Mordin was one of the best things I've ever seen.

[correctamundo]

Yea on both accounts. I don't particularly like the way they handled Kai Leng but I have no problem whatsoever with Thanes Death being unavoidable.

[Killroy]

Yea on both accounts. I don't particularly like the way they handled Kai Leng but I have no problem whatsoever with Thanes Death being unavoidable.

 

Even though it hinged on Thane becoming a complete idiot? "I know, I'll run at the man with a sword even though I have the advantage of range. Hurr!"

[correctamundo]

Like I wrote, Kai Leng was handled badly in general.

[Felya87]

Casualties should depend more on gameplay performance and less on "choices" and pretty much never on forced drama.

Every time a squadmate goes down in combat, increase that character's hidden death counter by 1. When it hits a certain number, they die permanently. Make that number persist through saves.

That way, you earn everyone's life, or cause their death, every time you step on the battlefield. If everyone lives in the end, you did a great job and deserve the good ending.

 

No, thanks. The companions AI usually have them run into enemies with suicidial intent. That means a level of stress I would not be ok with having at all. Plus, I'm terrible at shooters. This kind of gameplay would make me hate the gameplay even more.

[Jedi Comedian]

Kill them all. Let my main character do the missions by her/himself. Who needs squadmates anyways? ME3 was easy enough that I didn't need them. hahaha

I wouldn't have a problem if the squadmates could die in whatever situation that occurs.

That's the spirit.

About the topic: yea to squadmates dying depending on the MC choices, nay to unavoidable squadmates deaths (unless it is a situation like Virmire, in which you have to save one at the cost of sacrificing another).

[Sartoz]

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Squad mates/LIs allowed to die? That's a waste of the Word Budget don't you think? All that scripted and voiced dialogue (actor was paid) mostly for naught? Y

 

On the other hand, minor players (read cannon fodder) that die for "love of country" and have no meaningful impact to the game's progression can be made into a plausible plot twist or two. Even better if the right choices prevents their deaths.

 

 

[correctamundo]

It's never for naught. It's for another PT.

[daveliam]

I'm in favor of it.  Both scripted deaths and those where you have to choose between one of two squaddies to save.  I'm not a fan of the avoidable ones because, once you know how to save the character, you (the player) have to make a conscious effort to avoid those conditions for the character to die.  It feels very artificial.  It's one of the reasons why I think the suicide mission was a big fail.  Once I figured out how to save everyone, it felt silly to purposefully avoid loyalty missions and ship upgrades and to purposefully select a 'bad' candidate for each role, just to force the game to kill off a character.  I don't ever have an issue with characters getting killed off.  It's one case where I rather enjoy the "realism" of it.  It feels higher stakes if someone isn't come back home from the suicide mission. 

[Commander Rpg]

What are your thoughts on squadmates dying during the course of ME:A, whether unavoidable like Thane's death in ME3, or as a consequence of player choices? Do you prefer the writers not put squadmates at risk?

They are programmers, they have enough wit in their skulls to make choices like these, choices in any way dictated by the will to glom gold. Isn't it?

I'm tossing a few informations on the table, to demonstrate that both the options of having team-mates dying or not having team-mates dying is an equal quality choice, given that it's done by competent programmers and scripters.

Not making anyone dying is always convenient, if not conflicting with the story, it saves time from writing horrible deaths. On the other hand...

 

In Final Fantasy V, Galuf dies and he's replaced by his nephew, that has the same stats and abilities. Good choice, no bad consequences for your gameplay.

In Baldur's Gate II Yoshimo dies, whataver happens in a certain point of the game, leaving you without any good rogue to add in your team. Poor Choice, you don't have any replacement.

 

and

 

In Final Fantasy VII, Aerith dies without any compensatory consequence, and you have to go on your own. Good choice, adds elements to the story.

In the Fire Emblem's series, you can lose any unit (getting to a game over if it's a vital unit for the story) if that unit goes to zero hit points. Good and bad at the same time, there's a lot of pressure to the player, but also frustration if the player has done everything quite right and loses some character he likes for any reason.

 

It remains to be seen how the scripting and programming part is done.

[78stonewobble]

I think the game needs the possibility of anyone including your favorite team/squadmate/whatever character dying for there to be genuine tension.

 

I also think that it should be down to the players choices and performance to either save that particular person by sacrificing someone else or saving everyone.

 

Personally and without much thought put into it...

 

I think that if you do the "right" thing, throughout eg. 95 percent of the game, possibly also dependent on a certain minimum of difficulty, you get to save everyone.

 

At various levels down from doing the right thing below 95 percent of the game... you will have to sacrifice more and more and more people to win overall...

 

Down to ... not being able to win ... if having made some critical choices or just overall bad performance.

 

...

 

I think that's a nice spread of challenge vs. reward and emotional spectrum width.