104 réponses à ce sujet

[fogofeternity]

I see this comment made quite a lot. That if any members of your party died at the end then you're a bad or lazy player who "failed".

Seems relatively clear that there are two types of ME players predominantly; those who simply see it as a game to beat, and those who see it as an exceptional roleplaying/storytelling experience.

In terms of "beating the game", then clearly I didn't full succeed at the end. Jacob died in the vents, and Zaeed died leading the second distraction team. In terms of storyline though I found it rich and exciting, and from Jacob's death onwards I was second guessing my leadership choices and wondering what might happen to my squad.

I never felt like I was being blatantly reckless, or that the choices were particularly illogical. There was clearly debate about the best person to go through the vents (Jacob volunteered, Miranda's argument for a techie wasn't entirely conclusive). Zaeed has been a mercenary leader in the past, so reasonable for him to head up a distraction team. Both characters were loyal. But they still died.

The suggestion that people who lose squad members at the end should "reload the mission" seems the antithesis of storytelling, and one of the things that genuinely makes ME different from other games is the cinematic, epic scope of its story. It would seem completely pointless to me to reload.

So while I didn't "beat the game"  by getting everyone through, I tried my best as Shepard to do so, made some mistakes, and got a great and, importantly, very realistic end story. The results were heroic, made even more so by the poignancy of character's deaths. As a player I'm really happy those characters died, because it demonstrated again how ME is trying to provide a far more mature and cinematic experience to the player. 

[medlish]

I feel the same.



Even though I'll play it again and will save all eventually I still like my first playthrough best in terms of roleplaying. One person died but that's how life is. And it certainly will make the options of ME3 more interesting than having all people alive and well. Because that's boring.

[Wintermist]

You're both Krogan!

[Direwolf0294]

All my crew but Dr Chakwas died. I do feel like I failed but I also feel things like that somtimes happan and I have to do better next time. Just like Shepard says to Ashley about being a Sole Surviver (I think its Sole Surviver).

[Deltateam Elcor]

You humans are all racist.

[Taritu]

you didn't fail. That's the way it's supposed to be. I lost Tali my first run. I went back and redid it, but eh, that's because I want her around in ME3 and that's my canon shep. I actually woudln't have gone back for any other character.

[Fulgrim88]

Depends on the person i guess. I happened to rescue everyone at the first time, safe for Kelly and half the Crew because i didn't went through the Relay in time.
While it felt satisfying to make the right decisions (pick the right person for each job), i would have been equally satisfied with some casualties and i won't reload because of Kelly. To stand by his decisions, wether good or bad is one of the defining points of my Shep after all

Modifié par Fulgrim88, 04 février 2010 - 11:04 .

[Haasth]

I think it is more realistic and dramatic if some of the companions find their demise. I know I'll most likely have one die on purpose... not because I hate that character per-se... but because it feels more realistic to me.

[KroganBattleMaster212]

I only lost one squad member on my first playthrough and it made the end mission much more personal for me. It was Jacob and was like a slap to the face, his death made me question every decision I made and I really feared for the rest of my squad's safety. It made the game that much richer. I preferer character deaths as it adds weight to the 'suicide mission' and having everyone survive does not seem realistic to me.

[fogofeternity]

Fulgrim88 wrote...

Depends on the person i guess. I happened to rescue everyone at the first time, safe for Kelly and half the Crew because i didn't went through the Relay in time.
While it felt satisfying to make the right decisions (pick the right person for each job), i would have been equally satisfied with some casualties. To stand by his decisions, wether good or bad is one of the defining points of my Shep after all

I think that's the point. It's not that any particular outcome is "right", but that from storytelling terms the first run through, particularly done without reading the forums or guides, is the most genuine in terms of storytelling. Therefore it's the most convincing emotional experience for the player - good or bad.

Taritu wrote...

you didn't fail. That's the way it's supposed to be. I lost Tali my first run. I went back and redid it, but eh, that's because I want her around in ME3 and that's my canon shep. I actually woudln't have gone back for any other character.

That's still a different way of playing it though. I very much want Tali and Garrus to make it all the way through the trilogy. I took in-game actions to protect Tali in particular, as she's Shepard's LI and my Shepard would probably play favorites (basically by keeping her in my squad all the time). I couldn't be entirely sure that they'd work though; e.g. if I'd chosen the wrong biotic for that stage of the suicide mission I could have lost a party member.

Thing is, I want Tali around in ME3. If she'd died during the suicide mission I'd have been gutted. I don't think I'd have reloaded though. Even if I did reload and save her, I'd have "cheated" to do it, and that would have devalued her involvement in the story from then on.

Not that any particular way is better. I suppose I'd add a third type of player in your case. So you've got "beat the game...gamer", "what happens, happens...roleplayer" and "I'm telling my own tale...storyteller".

[Zandilar]

fogofeternity wrote...
The suggestion that people who lose squad members at the end should "reload the mission" seems the antithesis of storytelling, and one of the things that genuinely makes ME different from other games is the cinematic, epic scope of its story. It would seem completely pointless to me to reload.

No, it's really not the "antithesis of storytelling". I can't tell you how many times entire scenes have been cut and sometimes replaced in my writing. I've currently scrapped an entire novel and am in the middle of rewriting it. The story wasn't properly told in the first one, so I went back to a prior save and "reloaded", so to speak.

Once the story is finished and published, you can't "reload", however, storytelling is not the process of reading, it's a creative process that isn't always linear.

In other words: there's nothing wrong with reloading a game because you didn't like how the story went. It definitely isn't anti-storytelling - storytelling is fraught with "reloads", otherwise known as drafts and edits.

[wulf3n]

I wouldn't say you failed the game, however if i was in your position i would feel like i failed the characters that died i actually felt it was too easy to keep everyone alive, didn't really feel like a suicide mission.

[fogofeternity]

Zandilar wrote...

fogofeternity wrote...
The suggestion that people who lose squad members at the end should "reload the mission" seems the antithesis of storytelling, and one of the things that genuinely makes ME different from other games is the cinematic, epic scope of its story. It would seem completely pointless to me to reload.

No, it's really not the "antithesis of storytelling". I can't tell you how many times entire scenes have been cut and sometimes replaced in my writing. I've currently scrapped an entire novel and am in the middle of rewriting it. The story wasn't properly told in the first one, so I went back to a prior save and "reloaded", so to speak.

Once the story is finished and published, you can't "reload", however, storytelling is not the process of reading, it's a creative process that isn't always linear.

In other words: there's nothing wrong with reloading a game because you didn't like how the story went. It definitely isn't anti-storytelling - storytelling is fraught with "reloads", otherwise known as drafts and edits.

Yeah, antithesis of roleplaying probably a better description. It depends if you play the game as if you are the author, and want to tell a particular tale, or if you are the character, and want to experience it as it plays out around you.

[Moodath]

Since my 'main' playthrough is all about the desicions I personally would of made, I'm going to have loss.

The ships crew will die, because if i were actually on a suicide mission in the galactic core, i wouldn't risk sending off one of my squad to save the crew. Need all the help you can get kinda thing.

I sent garrus through the vent. Mistake in judgement? Kinda. To be fair he did just fine, he just has a big head that attracts bullets. I figured hey, he's a techy, and I trust him to get the job done.

Zaeed led the party (to be fair I accidently picked the wrong person. I WANTED to choose miranda but something happened...I might of had a stupid for a moment) and got wtf pwned.


So I might go back a refine some of the choices I made...like whether or not to shoot conrad in the foot, or to help the asari make a decision regarding the krogan lover, but I won't change the ending. Garrus is dead.../sadface...the crew will be dead.../RIP doctor chakwas...and the ship is wtf sploded. And i'm ok with that, I certaintly didn't feel like I failed.

Don't get me wrong...watching garrus eat it was shockingly meaningful..."YAY WE MADE IT THROUGH THE VENTS!! ....YAY TEAM 2 IS HERE!  GARRUS....GARRUS MOVE YOUR HEAD....NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"
I had a sadface after that

[Taritu]

Well, it varies. Tali died because Zaeed supposedly isn't a good squad leader, and while he's Bioware's character I just don't agree with that. He started the Blue Suns, led men in combat and has more experience in combat than anyone in the group except Samara (who is not a leader). I thought very carefully about who to put in charge of that squad.



The idea that he doesn't know how to organize covering fire as well as Miranda or Jacob or Garrus just doesn't cut it with me.



Anyway, I respect the "let the dice fall where they may" idea. Unfortunately, I now know what the game needs to get you through.



And I'm a writer and author irl. So maybe I'm not quite able to let go when I have other options. Though through the entire playthrough that's the only time I reloaded to alter a decision.



But anyway, the original question was whether you failed. Of course you didn't.

[Sharn01]

No one complains about people getting member's of their team killed really, some people intentionally kill off character's they do not like.



Its just that there where an awful lot of post's by people asking how to keep every one alive when it was really just common sense.



For instance in your run, Jacob was not a tech guy, and Zaed is not only a DLC character, red flag there, but also tells stories how almost every team he led got wiped out, and how he was happy about it because it was more loot for him, that is not really leadership material.



Not that you did it wrong, but if you came to the forum's and asked why o why are people not living, you would get harassed at this point.

[Rapamaha1]

its all about the playstyle, when I play RPG's first time I dont reload game becose I made bad decision, I like to suffer the consequeses of my actions, like the developers said about SWTOR "you cant save your game and then reload becose you didnt like the how it turned out" I like to think the possible outcomes before making that decision and then go on and see how it turns out, it also gives game more replay value if you dont know all the possible outcomes on your first playtrough

[fogofeternity]

Taritu wrote...

Well, it varies. Tali died because Zaeed supposedly isn't a good squad leader, and while he's Bioware's character I just don't agree with that. He started the Blue Suns, led men in combat and has more experience in combat than anyone in the group except Samara (who is not a leader). I thought very carefully about who to put in charge of that squad..

Yeah, I definitely though Zaeed would be more effective as a team leader given his background.

[Sodapop VII]

I had only one character death during the end sequence and that was Thane, because I lost track of the Turian you were supposed to be tracking in his loyalty mission. As a result with all the chaos in the suicide mission I did not realize he has been killed until seeing an empty chair in the life support room and the memorial container in the cargo cutscene.
I looked at it in two ways and said that it is pointless to play this sort of game if every character has an immunity to death because that cheapens the experience. On the other hand I want Mass Effect to be one of the most action packed and full of content games I ever play... And despite Thane's looming death with his illness I am sure one way or another he will be involved in the game. So I had to go back about ten hours of work (Mostly Mining) and replayed it all with the exact same decisions and got the 100% happy ending instead. I suppose it is cheating myself out of a realistic experience, but then again so is pressing A button to resume after you die in a way.

Don't regret it though... If people die in Mass Effect 3 (which chances are they will) Then I will probably stick it out. It just so happens that I want as much of a game for ME3 as I possibly can.

Modifié par Sodapop VII, 04 février 2010 - 11:56 .

[ProfessorIncante]

you havent "failed" in any way.

its like...your Story.

i, for one, couldnt let anyone die..they are my Team and...uhm....yeah...

[Zalanth]

I screwed up a bit.

I knew Tali had to be the best choice for the vent (Legion was in my team so he was not an option) but I was scared she was going to die as she's my favourite character so I sent Garrus instead. Woops! So In a way Garrus' death is my fault as a leader as I didn't send the best person for the job in due to personal feelings.

Then for the second team leader part I messed up again. I wanted to choose someone who I thought everyone would respect. I didn't want to choose a pure Cerberus person as I knew some people (Tali) hate the group. I went about it the wrong way and instead of choosing a leader I wanted someone who I thought the group would respect and all listen to so I chose Samara. Which is ridiculous now that I look back on it as she has no experience being in a group at all!

Then Mordin died at very end off-screen. Why? Beats me! Maybe because I didn't have his amp or something.

All my team were loyal however and I'd done every mission so those deaths were on me.

I'm going to re-play 2 before 3 undoubtedly but I'm not sure if I'll go with the same choices intentionally or I'll save everyone. The thing is, although I am tempted to screw up deliberetaly to match my first time and to keep it feeling "real" I want the most I can out of Mass Effect 3 and I feel like I'd want to have everyone alive to get that experience.
But who knows what I'll eventually do. I'll make that decision in a couple years time when I have to.

[tsd16]

I completely agree with you. You can play the game however you want.



The only thing that irks me about it, are the people that dont want bioware to have the final mission deaths affect the constitution of their squad in ME3. i.e. instead of missing some squad members because a few died in ME2, they would rather bioware not include any of the squad members from ME2, so bioware doesnt "screw" them out of content. I call them lazy, because if bioware does include a few of the ME2 cast as squad members, and they want them, but they died, then go back and save them dont **** and complain, your decisions impacted your game, and I think thats a great RPG, which is what people like, big decision has a big impact, if you dont like it play it differently.

[Samurro]

I can agree with the OP. My problem with my ending was that my shep always tried to be the best leader a leader can be. And I lost 5 people in the end which made me so ****ing sad, because I even don't know why I lost them, it is a game flaw, imo. Why does Miranda survive when she got hit by the broken stone thing and Garrus died? Just because I didn't do his "quest". My shephard would rather give his life away to save Garrus for example, so no I won't take that savegame to ME3, will play again and try to loose no crew member at all.

Because my mission is to make the impossible possible!

[fogofeternity]

tsd16 wrote...

The only thing that irks me about it, are the people that dont want bioware to have the final mission deaths affect the constitution of their squad in ME3. i.e. instead of missing some squad members because a few died in ME2, they would rather bioware not include any of the squad members from ME2, so bioware doesnt "screw" them out of content. I call them lazy, because if bioware does include a few of the ME2 cast as squad members, and they want them, but they died, then go back and save them dont **** and complain, your decisions impacted your game, and I think thats a great RPG, which is what people like, big decision has a big impact, if you dont like it play it differently.

Yeah, I've talked about that elsewhere on the forum. That given the focus of ME2, and the fact that it's not actually that difficult for Bioware to include heavy roleplay for all of the ME2 squadmates if they wanted to, it would be bizarre if they weren't a major factor (at least some of them).

I think too many people are viewing it as three seperate games, whereas it does seem clear that for the trilogy (and for ME2 > ME3 in particular) Bioware are trying something for more ambitious and interlinked. So in essence you have to look at it as a single entity, in which case nobody is being "screwed" out of anything, because the content you experience is based on how you play the game from Eden Prime to whatever the ME3 conclusion is.

[TLK Spires]

my idea of realistic was 'do the impossible yet again', and i did. i got every single person out of there alive.



it'll be exactly the same in ME3.