121 réponses à ce sujet

[ChaoticBroth]

Kuari999 wrote...

The threads annoy me because they obviously ARE going to carry over to the next game. You don't make a game that focuses almost entirely on your squad if the squad isn't going to be important. It would make ME2 entirely pointless.  They repeatedly warned us ME2 will have dire consequences on ME3.  So why make the most important consequences unimportant?

Eh, they're fans. And plus, people will complain no matter what you do. There's some already pre-established elements that influence whether certain characters (ex. Thane) will make it into ME3. Unless, of course, the time gap between ME2 and 3 are extremely small.

And yeah, whine threads. About two times more annoying than fan threads.

[Collider]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
Fair enough, but that's only applicable to a couple characters, really.

There's only like 2 threads saying x character should be "alive." I don't think "alive" is meant only to say alive literally, but also more than cameos.

If they kept the existing characters around, they'd still have to design replacement characters for their roles if they're absent. See Urdnot Wreav in place of Urdnot Wrex.

Minor characters like Urdnot Wreav do not go through so many designs before finalized. The same video I referenced to basically says this. A squad mate has many different concepts that get scrapped or edited, while a bartender at Omega is easy - first design, bam, you're good. Wrex=/=Wreav, Wrex has much more content to him. Furthermore, the replacements don't even have to be new characters. For example, should Tali die, you can speak to one of the Quarian admirals in ME2 instead. Bam.

It's more work to keep the existing ones alive and still have to make the new ones for those who killed those people off.

Bioware doesn't have to do the bare minimum. It's clear that they haven't and will continue to go above and beyond. Having romance for Tali, Garrus and Thane is more work, but they did it anyways. The replacements shouldn't be too difficult.

Also, let me apologize for not proofreading the post you are responding to. I meant "if bioware has done it before, they CAN do it again." I have a habit of doing negative forms of things when I don't really intend to.

[Kuari999]

ChaoticBroth wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

The threads annoy me because they obviously ARE going to carry over to the next game. You don't make a game that focuses almost entirely on your squad if the squad isn't going to be important. It would make ME2 entirely pointless.  They repeatedly warned us ME2 will have dire consequences on ME3.  So why make the most important consequences unimportant?

Eh, they're fans. And plus, people will complain no matter what you do. There's some already pre-established elements that influence whether certain characters (ex. Thane) will make it into ME3. Unless, of course, the time gap between ME2 and 3 are extremely small.

And yeah, whine threads. About two times more annoying than fan threads.

Yeah, for those chars I understand.  Maybe some char interactions will be based on other chars being alive...  Mordin for example...  he seemed to be working on a cure for Joker, who knows how that will work out with a char like Thane...  Tali I could see MAYBE becoming an Admiral...  Garrus?  Where the hell would he go?  Legion?  He didn't go seek you out just to leave before the job is done.  Grunt?  You're his battlemaster.  Jacob and Miranda?  They have no where else to go...  Jack?  in the Paragon ending, you're an enemy of Cerberus now...  who better to kill Cerberus with?  I really could go on, but really, the only way they could legitly remove most of these chars is through already established elements and if they pull another destruction of Normandy.

[cpolisch]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

Throwing in my support for Blank in ME3.

Made my day. 

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Collider wrote...

Minor characters like Urdnot Wreav do not go through so many designs before finalized. The same video I referenced to basically says this. A squad mate has many different concepts that get scrapped or edited, while a bartender at Omega is easy - first design, bam, you're good. Wrex=/=Wreav, Wrex has much more content to him. Furthermore, the replacements don't even have to be new characters. For example, should Tali die, you can speak to one of the Quarian admirals in ME2 instead. Bam.

To an extent that works, but only in the sense that they won't have to fully design a new character. They'd still have to record the lines over again for a new reader, program their animations, etc.

Bioware doesn't have to do the bare minimum. It's clear that they haven't and will continue to go above and beyond. Having romance for Tali, Garrus and Thane is more work, but they did it anyways. The replacements shouldn't be too difficult.

Also, let me apologize for not proofreading the post you are responding to. I meant "if bioware has done it before, they CAN do it again." I have a habit of doing negative forms of things when I don't really intend to.

BioWare has shown in ME2 that cameos and carry-overs aren't ground-breaking at all.
If people would be satisfied with a role like Wrex has in ME2, then cool. But most people wouldn't. If Tali was reduced to a Wrex-style role because she's potentially dead people are going to throw a hissy fit. Realistically they can't do roles larger than that for 11+ characters who are all potentially dead, and they still have to appeal to newcomers.

My only point here is that people seem worried that their fav chars will get crapped on in ME3 like Kaidan, Ashley, Liara, and Wrex were crapped on in ME2.
I'm saying that they really shouldn't get their hopes up. That's all.

[fortunesque]

Do you think *your* fruity little online thread is going to do anything?

[Kuari999]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

BioWare has shown in ME2 that cameos and carry-overs aren't ground-breaking at all.
If people would be satisfied with a role like Wrex has in ME2, then cool. But most people wouldn't. If Tali was reduced to a Wrex-style role because she's potentially dead people are going to throw a hissy fit. Realistically they can't do roles larger than that for 11+ characters who are all potentially dead, and they still have to appeal to newcomers.

My only point here is that people seem worried that their fav chars will get crapped on in ME3 like Kaidan, Ashley, Liara, and Wrex were crapped on in ME2.
I'm saying that they really shouldn't get their hopes up. That's all.

Except think about these two things...  Ashley/Kaidan, Liara, and Wrex each had VERY good reasons for not joining up with you...  Tali and Garrus, who had little excuse, jumped on the boat as soon as they could...  plus again, quite frankly having them be minor chars in ME3 makes it where their deaths are minor consequences, not dire consequences like they keep insisting ME2 will lead to in ME3.  ME3 is a finale, all the chars people know and love should in theory have importance.

Modifié par Kuari999, 09 février 2010 - 03:26 .

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Kuari999 wrote...
Except think about these two things...  Ashley/Kaidan, Liara, and Wrex each had VERY good reasons for not joining up with you...  Tali and Garrus, who had little excuse, jumped on the boat as soon as they could...  plus again, quite frankly having them be minor chars in ME3 makes it where their deaths are minor consequences, not dire consequences like they keep insisting ME2 will lead to in ME3.  ME3 is a finale, all the chars people know and love should in theory have importance.

So, if Garrus and Tali have good reasons as to why they have crappy roles in ME3 people will be satisfied? Hell no, they won't.

ALL the ME2 characters can die in random ways. That goes pretty far to show that they are by and large expendable for the trilogy. Expecting them all, or even 2 specific ones, to have gigantic and super-important roles in ME3 is very unrealistic.

[Gorthaur the Cruel]

I wonder how mad the OP would be if i made a:

Keep *Keep *blank* alive!!! threads*
Alive Thread

[Collider]

[quote]Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
BioWare has shown in ME2 that cameos and carry-overs aren't ground-breaking at all.[/quote]
Never said they were. You can look at Bioware games in their entirety and say they are at the very least unique. It is hard to say anything in video games these days are ground breaking.

If people would be satisfied with a role like Wrex has in ME2, then cool. But most people wouldn't. If Tali was reduced to a Wrex-style role because she's potentially dead people are going to throw a hissy fit. [/quote]
All the more reason not to have them be just cameos.

[quote]Realistically they can't do roles larger than that for 11+ characters who are all potentially dead, and they still have to appeal to newcomers.[/quote]
I really don't see why. They had Kaidan and Ashley on horizon and Wrex on Tuchanka, despite their capacity to be dead. If they can give the 11 squad mates large roles in Mass Effect 2 in the first place, they can do it again - realistically - in Mass Effect 3. You may as well say that Mass Effect 2 couldn't have more than 6 squad mates because Mass Effect 1 only had 2 squad mates. They can always top themselves.

[quote]My only point here is that people seem worried that their fav chars will get crapped on in ME3 like Kaidan, Ashley, Liara, and Wrex were crapped on in ME2.[/quote]
I sense some bitterness here. I don't think those characters were being crapped on. Instead, the fact that they can't join is a plot device. They want those characters (possibly aside from Wrex) to survive in ME2 so they can have large roles in ME3. They've already stated this. It's easier to just use the existing squad mates instead of creating new squad mates just because some people could have botched the suicide mission.

[quote]I'm saying that they really shouldn't get their hopes up. That's all.
[/quote]
I agree. I just don't think it is a matter of what is realistic or not. We don't have the stastisics, and we are not developers from Bioware. We can only guess. What I am saying is that it may not be so far-fetched as you may think. This is the last game in the trilogy, Bioware doesn't have to worry about Mass Effect 3 being imported to anything. They can go all out without worrying about whether x character will be in ME4 and in what way.

[ThatDancingTurian]

They aren't going to do the Liara/Ash/Kaidan thing in ME3. Reasons?

• ME2 was all about building a team, thus making it easier to go straight into the plot in the next game. There's no point to ME2 otherwise and ME2 was developed with the next part in mind, so this makes sense.
• Restricting ME2 characters to cameos means not only wasting time, but rewarding people who only played the bare minimum of ME2 and punishing those that did it right. That makes no sense because those people are obviously not going to care about new characters in ME3 anyway, so why waste resources developing them?
• ME3 is the end of the trilogy. It's all about concluding plotlines. That includes love interests.
• The ME1 characters had a game to develop their romance. The ME2
  characters had a game to develop their romance. They're on even ground
  moving into ME3, so the only fair move -- especially considering the vast amount of people that went for the new ones over the old -- is to give Shepard equal time with their LI no matter which game they came from.

This whole 'ME1 LIs got screwed, so ME2 fans should get screwed next time!' attitude is stupid. Common sense regarding trilogies says that ME2 and ME3 are not going to be even remotely the same game.

[BobbyTheI]

Rats, here I thought this post was going to be an index of "Keep this character alive" threads. So many these days, I'd like some way to keep track.

Oh, and keep Jahleed alive for ME3. Preferably with a romance.
 

[Malanek]

People are showing support for their favourite characters. There is nothing wrong with that. Bioware have shown that they listen to this sort of thing ie Tali and Garrus so you cannot say it is useless. I think there is a good chance they will bring characters back in ME3. I don't think anyone without inside knowledge can rule it out. Just don't get too down hearted if your favourite character isn't back.

[Kuari999]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
So, if Garrus and Tali have good reasons as to why they have crappy roles in ME3 people will be satisfied? Hell no, they won't.

ALL the ME2 characters can die in random ways. That goes pretty far to show that they are by and large expendable for the trilogy. Expecting them all, or even 2 specific ones, to have gigantic and super-important roles in ME3 is very unrealistic.

Not really.  They warned us there'd be dire consequences from choices in ME2...  is it unrealistic to expect them to be 100% necessary?  No, but I DO expect that the consequences of them dying being a bit more than simply losing a cameo.  Very little beyond the survival of your squad and the final decision screams important to ME3 and again, they focused on the squad for this entire game....  to the point where YOU die if you lose everyone.  What would the point be if they weren't going to be important?  They could have skipped ME2 and just made ME3 if that was the case.

Edit: HELL, they don't even need to make replacement chars in some cases probably, not having them could me a major consequence in itself...  like losing Legion hurts missions involving the Geth potentially.  It'd ****** some people off if they lost people, but if such things weren't going to matter, well, there wouldn't have been a point to going through the trouble for this import system.

Modifié par Kuari999, 09 février 2010 - 03:41 .

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Collider wrote...

I really don't see why. They had Kaidan and Ashley on horizon and Wrex on Tuchanka, despite their capacity to be dead. If they can give the 11 squad mates large roles in Mass Effect 2 in the first place, they can do it again - realistically - in Mass Effect 3. You may as well say that Mass Effect 2 couldn't have more than 6 squad mates because Mass Effect 1 only had 2 squad mates. They can always top themselves.

ME2 had 11 squaddies, but they took over 90% of the story as a result. ME3 can't get away with making that many squadmates and keeping them all as in-depth unless they want to make the story as shallow as ME2. And let's face it, ME2's A plot was known in its entirety after about an hour of gameplay.

They can try to top themselves, but will they? Not likely.

[Collider]

All speculation, as well as subjective. You can't seriously think it is humanly impossible to employ the same amount of significance to characters as well as story. Mass Effect 2 already topped ME1 in my opinion, so I am not exactly thinking that it is impossible Mass Effect 3 will follow suit.

[Kuari999]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Collider wrote...

I really don't see why. They had Kaidan and Ashley on horizon and Wrex on Tuchanka, despite their capacity to be dead. If they can give the 11 squad mates large roles in Mass Effect 2 in the first place, they can do it again - realistically - in Mass Effect 3. You may as well say that Mass Effect 2 couldn't have more than 6 squad mates because Mass Effect 1 only had 2 squad mates. They can always top themselves.

ME2 had 11 squaddies, but they took over 90% of the story as a result. ME3 can't get away with making that many squadmates and keeping them all as in-depth unless they want to make the story as shallow as ME2. And let's face it, ME2's A plot was known in its entirety after about an hour of gameplay.

They can try to top themselves, but will they? Not likely.

That's actually the point.  Why try to establish all new squadmates when you have the people already? Plus, say you lost your standard crew...  you expect me to believe they'd throw you on the Normandy with only you, Joker, EDI and Chakwas?  And again, there must be a REASON ME2 focused on the squad so much.  No good story does that sort of thing without a reason.

Modifié par Kuari999, 09 février 2010 - 03:57 .

[ODST 3]

HelterSkelter89 wrote...

these threads are really annoying, you are not accomplishing anything. bioware has already shown they don't care about what their fans like about their games by adding ammo to the game and taking away the awesome amount of weapons, armor, upgrades, and skill points from the first one. do you really think having some fruity little online petition is going to affect anything?

There are more weapons in Mass Effect 2. Don't tell me you actually counted the Kessler IXVIX as different than the Kessler I. Ammo was a balance device that works fine for me, but then, I know where the X button is. Half the armors looked stupid in ME 1 anyway.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Kuari999 wrote...

That's actually the point.  Why try to establish all new squadmates when you have the people already? Plus, say you lost your standard crew...  you expect me to believe they'd throw you on the Normandy with only you, Joker, EDI and Chakwas?  And again, there must be a REASON ME2 focused on the squad so much.  No good story does that sort of thing without a reason.

Maybe they didn't have enough plot to focus on anything else?

Would have been a 3 hour game if they didn't throw the squad-building at us. And since they can all die, clearly they aren't uber important characters. If what Casey says is true (I have my doubts after everything, though...) then Liara and them weren't in the squad because they need to be kept alive to finish the story.

That's clearly not the case with ME2 squaddies.

[Railstay]

Why are you guys helping the OP troll? The entire reason he made the thread is because he's raging about the ammo system in ME2.



But I digress. I don't understand how anyone could be disappointed at how ME2 handled the fate of your old crew. It was well written, perfectly believable and all of them played important roles. Kaidan/Ashley don't want to join you out of loyalty to the Alliance, Liara because of her role as an information broker and Wrex is fulfilling the promise he made to his grandfather to reorganize the krogan people. I fully expected the cameos to be lame, like Wrex talking about wanting to do solo gigs or whatever, but when I saw him as Clan Leader of Urdnot, I suddenly DIDN'T want him to come with me anymore. I was happy my favorite NPC from the first game was making a difference.



He's also wearing his family armor, the same one I helped him recover in ME1. It was a nice touch.

[Railstay]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...
Except think about these two things...  Ashley/Kaidan, Liara, and Wrex each had VERY good reasons for not joining up with you...  Tali and Garrus, who had little excuse, jumped on the boat as soon as they could...  plus again, quite frankly having them be minor chars in ME3 makes it where their deaths are minor consequences, not dire consequences like they keep insisting ME2 will lead to in ME3.  ME3 is a finale, all the chars people know and love should in theory have importance.

So, if Garrus and Tali have good reasons as to why they have crappy roles in ME3 people will be satisfied? Hell no, they won't.

ALL the ME2 characters can die in random ways. That goes pretty far to show that they are by and large expendable for the trilogy. Expecting them all, or even 2 specific ones, to have gigantic and super-important roles in ME3 is very unrealistic.

Wrex, Kaiden and Ashley could all be killed in the original game.  Does that mean these characters are expendable and forgettable as well?

[marshalleck]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

That's actually the point.  Why try to establish all new squadmates when you have the people already? Plus, say you lost your standard crew...  you expect me to believe they'd throw you on the Normandy with only you, Joker, EDI and Chakwas?  And again, there must be a REASON ME2 focused on the squad so much.  No good story does that sort of thing without a reason.

Maybe they didn't have enough plot to focus on anything else?

Would have been a 3 hour game if they didn't throw the squad-building at us. And since they can all die, clearly they aren't uber important characters. If what Casey says is true (I have my doubts after everything, though...) then Liara and them weren't in the squad because they need to be kept alive to finish the story.

That's clearly not the case with ME2 squaddies.

As I recall, you've got kind of a poor track record for predicting how games will turn out.

Let's see...Samara romanceable? Not really. No Garrus romance? You were wrong there. Shepard is a cyborg? Nope.

Just saying. They only thing I suspect you're right about is "I am highly pre-disposed to find something I don't like."

Modifié par marshalleck, 09 février 2010 - 04:14 .

[Kuari999]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

That's actually the point.  Why try to establish all new squadmates when you have the people already? Plus, say you lost your standard crew...  you expect me to believe they'd throw you on the Normandy with only you, Joker, EDI and Chakwas?  And again, there must be a REASON ME2 focused on the squad so much.  No good story does that sort of thing without a reason.

Maybe they didn't have enough plot to focus on anything else?

Would have been a 3 hour game if they didn't throw the squad-building at us. And since they can all die, clearly they aren't uber important characters. If what Casey says is true (I have my doubts after everything, though...) then Liara and them weren't in the squad because they need to be kept alive to finish the story.

That's clearly not the case with ME2 squaddies.

Well obviously they don't need to be alive to complete the story, but that doesn't mean not having them can't have extreme consequences that may cause issues and make things a bit harder one way or another.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

marshalleck wrote...
As I recall, you've got kind of a poor track record for predicting how games will turn out.

Let's see...Samara romanceable? Not really. No Garrus romance? You were wrong there. Shepard is a cyborg? Nope.

Just saying.

Samara was exploited like no other in advertisements and magazines when it came to romance. Garrus is a disgusting cricket (yeah, that's my opinion). Predicting romance is not like what I'm doing now, though.

As for Shepard being a cyborg... I never predicted that. I wrote that I was worried about it happening. And BioWare didn't touch on Shepard's resurrection at all, so she may as well be a zombie robot for all we know.

[marshalleck]

I just remembered that you called the Hammerhead being DLC. You hit that one on the nose.