121 réponses à ce sujet

[AccursedOdin]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Hey, I hope you're happy with what happens in ME3. I'm not content to sit back and hope that BioWare will get it right because I honestly don't think they will. Yeah, I'm pessimistic, but I call them as I see them. I'm not saying "I'm right and you're wrong!", I'm simply defending my position.

 I completely undersand where you're coming from and to be completely honest, I actually kind of agree with your position; I'd love nothing more than to see my surviving crew from both ME games in the finale, and would love to have them with me rather than reduced to a cameo role. However I do see the huge task of making this a reality, and we just have to hope that Bioware can somehow make it work and hope for the best while readying myself for the worst (a bit dramatic, but you get my meaning), and that's what myself and I assume all the folks in these "Keep______ Alive!!" thread people are doing.

[Kenthen]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

That completely depends on what was more important. Is it more important that the job got done? Or is it more important that the squad survived?

To quote Legion:
"Yes."

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...
They were able to die because that was the big gimmick of ME2; ME2, the game where everyone can die! They made -everyone- able to die so when you lose one or two of them, it could be anyone. Not to imply you should kamikaze and start all over in ME3. They're going to put in options for people who do that, but they're not going to design ME3 from the perspective of that small percentage of players. It just doesn't make sense.

It's not about the small percentage of players who get the most amount of people killed. It's about the spectrum.

A LOT of people will be importing where only 1 or 2 people died. The problem is that the deaths during the mission are randomized. So those 1 or 2 people in each individual playthrough can be any one of them.

That means they have to account for everyone dying, even if only 0-2 people will be dead in the vast majority of player imports. That means the roles have to either be small or kinda generic and largely unimportant, right? Otherwise people will be missing out on substantial content simply because X is the only one who died in their playthrough.

[Collider]

The deaths on the suicide mission aren't completely random. For every Normandy upgrade you don't get, someone dies. That isn't random - the easy cure is to research said technology.
I recognize that one (at max 2) squad mates may die randomly. I haven't experienced it, but I've read that Mordin in particular is prone to it. However, that is just 1 or 2 squad mates, and it is easily fixed by reloading. You don't need to play the entire game over again, unless you botched your saves and cannot reload before the collector base. Loyalty missions are reminded to you repeatedly by Kelly.

It is not completely random, as I said. An appropriate tech specialist won't die if there is an appropriate fireteam leader. Loyalty of course plays a factor in this. Etc.

They can die because that is what the entire game is set up around. You may as say the some things about Kaidan and Ashley. Yes, one or the other has to survive, but it's the same exact thing for the suicide mission. You have to have 1-2 squad mates still alive or Shepard will die and you cant import the save.

Modifié par Collider, 09 février 2010 - 05:25 .

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Collider wrote...

The deaths on the suicide mission aren't completely random. For every Normandy upgrade you don't get, someone dies. That isn't random - the easy cure is to research said technology.
I recognize that one (at max 2) squad mates may die randomly. I haven't experienced it, but I've read that Mordin in particular is prone to it. However, that is just 1 or 2 squad mates, and it is easily fixed by reloading. You don't need to play the entire game over again, unless you botched your saves and cannot reload before the collector base. Loyalty missions are reminded to you repeatedly by Kelly.

It is not completely random, as I said. An appropriate tech specialist won't die if there is an appropriate fireteam leader. Loyalty of course plays a factor in this. Etc.

They can die because that is what the entire game is set up around. You may as say the some things about Kaidan and Ashley. Yes, one or the other has to survive, but it's the same exact thing for the suicide mission. You have to have 1-2 squad mates still alive or Shepard will die and you cant import the save.

Many of them are 100% random. Let me explain that, though. Take the biotic bubble mission. If you choose an inferior biotic, then who dies? One of your squadmates. Not the biotic, but one of your squadmates. That squadmate could be anyone. It completely depends on who you decided to have in your squad there.

So, the deaths are scripted, but who dies is essentially random in terms carrying deaths over. Everyone has an equal chance of being dead.

[Collider]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
That means they have to account for everyone dying, even if only 0-2 people will be dead in the vast majority of player imports. That means the roles have to either be small or kinda generic and largely unimportant, right? Otherwise people will be missing out on substantial content simply because X is the only one who died in their playthrough.

Not exactly. You can skip recruiting one (possibly 2) squad mates before the suicide mission. At the same time, these squad mates are still very well fleshed out - at least to the point of being equal to the other squad mates. An individual squad mate is not "massive content." The roles don't have to be small. Whether they are largely unimportant is subjective. Obviously, these squad mates who can die cannot be so integral to the plot that it is impossible to complete the game without them. That doesn't necessarily force them to small, unimportant roles. Take for example, like I said, the squad mate that doesn't need to be recruited. You don't need to recruit Tali or Legion, but they still take the important role of tech specialist. If you don't recruit either, you need to use someone inappropriate and in the process get them killed.

[Collider]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
So, the deaths are scripted, but who dies is essentially random in terms carrying deaths over. Everyone has an equal chance of being dead.

This is false. It is not straight up random. It is dependant on your decisions. If you make the right decisions, you will have everyone survive every time, save for 1-2 which seem likely to be glitches. Only peeps in the engineering area will die if you don't get the shielding, for example. It's not completely random. Being random in the sense that Tali, Jack, or Grunt dies if you don't get shielding, it is easily fixed by reloading, or researching the technology.

[ThatDancingTurian]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

It's not about the small percentage of players who get the most amount of people killed. It's about the spectrum.

A LOT of people will be importing where only 1 or 2 people died. The problem is that the deaths during the mission are randomized. So those 1 or 2 people in each individual playthrough can be any one of them.

That means they have to account for everyone dying, even if only 0-2 people will be dead in the vast majority of player imports. That means the roles have to either be small or kinda generic and largely unimportant, right? Otherwise people will be missing out on substantial content simply because X is the only one who died in their playthrough.

But that still leaves the majority of characters alive and invested in the story for a vast majority of players. That means that every single one of them will be alive for a large percentage of the players however the deaths are divided between them, even more so for LIs because people go out of their way to keep them around. That's enough of a probability to justify keeping them in the game versus the reasons not to.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Collider wrote...

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
So, the deaths are scripted, but who dies is essentially random in terms carrying deaths over. Everyone has an equal chance of being dead.

This is false. It is not straight up random. It is dependant on your decisions. If you make the right decisions, you will have everyone survive every time, save for 1-2 which seem likely to be glitches. Only peeps in the engineering area will die if you don't get the shielding, for example. It's not completely random. Being random in the sense that Tali, Jack, or Grunt dies if you don't get shielding, it is easily fixed by reloading, or researching the technology.

Reread what I said. They are essentially random in terms of carrying deaths over. BioWare may able to say, "Oh, the squadmate died during the bubble mission." but that squaddie could have been anyone.
I probably shouldn't have used the word random. I only meant that no character is more likely to live than any other.

[Collider]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...
Reread what I said. They are essentially random in terms of carrying deaths over. BioWare may able to say, "Oh, the squadmate died during the bubble mission." but that squaddie could have been anyone.
I probably shouldn't have used the word random. I only meant that no character is more likely to live than any other.

Alright, I get you. But this doesn't mean that Bioware will have them have only small roles. What constitutes as "small" is semantics, really, though. I might argue that the fact that they are somewhat "random" may compel Bioware to make sure all/most/more of these squad mates have roles larger than cameos, to account for the fact that they do not know for certain those who were most likely to die. The feedback option does help, though. And as Aris said, the love interests are among the seemingly most likely to survive.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...

But that still leaves the majority of characters alive and invested in the story for a vast majority of players. That means that every single one of them will be alive for a large percentage of the players however the deaths are divided between them, even more so for LIs because people go out of their way to keep them around. That's enough of a probability to justify keeping them in the game versus the reasons not to.

It doesn't matter if people go out of their way to save their individual love interest because who that love interest is varies from person to person. So it makes virtually no difference between, say, Jack and Samara. You can't really say that Jack is more desirable than Samara in ME3. Well, you could say that, but it'd be guesswork.

Which seems to be where we've ended up: nothing but guesswork.
Guesswork at what will or will not be the majority; guesswork at what constitutes "important" or "significant" as a character role; guesswork at how much BioWare is willing to do; guesswork at how much importance can be read into Casey's claims that Liara/Ash/Kai were excluded from the suicide mission because they're meant to have a large role in ME3.

We can wait and see, and that's about it.

[ThatDancingTurian]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

It doesn't matter if people go out of their way to save their individual love interest because who that love interest is varies from person to person. So it makes virtually no difference between, say, Jack and Samara. You can't really say that Jack is more desirable than Samara in ME3. Well, you could say that, but it'd be guesswork.

Which seems to be where we've ended up: nothing but guesswork.
Guesswork at what will or will not be the majority; guesswork at what constitutes "important" or "significant" as a character role; guesswork at how much BioWare is willing to do; guesswork at how much importance can be read into Casey's claims that Liara/Ash/Kai were excluded from the suicide mission because they're meant to have a large role in ME3.

We can wait and see, and that's about it.

It does matter statistically speaking. Jack has another variable in her favor as opposed to Samara as to why she would be kept alive, that being that some will have engaged in her romance.

But I guess we're done here if you've run out of things to argue aside from belittling arguments by calling them invalid instead of offering an actual rebuttal.

[lyssalu]

we got tali garrus and a sexy malien by complaining



in any event i dont see how it hurts

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...
It does matter statistically speaking. Jack has another variable in her favor as opposed to Samara as to why she would be kept alive, that being that some will have engaged in her romance.

But I guess we're done here if you've run out of things to argue aside from belittling arguments by calling them invalid instead of offering an actual rebuttal.

Heh, the passive aggressive approach just really makes you look so much better.

I've said my piece. I can go back over all my other evidence if you want. But at this point the only course of action is engaging ina  completely cyclical manner.

You say Jack has more evidence in her favor of reappearing because she's a LI. Okay, how is that anything but 100% subjective?

She and Samara have the same chance of being dead. And if they're dead then it seems a waste for BioWare to write a large role for them, especially if they have to account for 11 different people, or even just the 6 romantic interests.

But again, I've said this before. Cyclical.

[ThatDancingTurian]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

Heh, the passive aggressive approach just really makes you look so much better.

I've said my piece. I can go back over all my other evidence if you want. But at this point the only course of action is engaging ina  completely cyclical manner.

You say Jack has more evidence in her favor of reappearing because she's a LI. Okay, how is that anything but 100% subjective?

She and Samara have the same chance of being dead. And if they're dead then it seems a waste for BioWare to write a large role for them, especially if they have to account for 11 different people, or even just the 6 romantic interests.

But again, I've said this before. Cyclical.

Wait. I'm being passive aggressive? The passive-aggressiveness of your statement there isn't lost on me, btw. Nice smiley.

I was making a point. You run out of things to say, so because you want the last word, you strive to invalidate someone else's argument. You could just say, 'I have nothing else to say here' or simply not reply, instead of giving off the air of 'oh, well as I anticipated, you all have devolved into guesswork, I guess I'm just too highbrow for this conversation'.

It's not subjective because it adds a level of in-game attachment to the character that simply is not available to the others. That isn't subjective, it's fact.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...

]Wait. I'm being passive aggressive? The passive-aggressiveness of your statement there isn't lost on me, btw. Nice smiley.

I was making a point. You run out of things to say, so because you want the last word, you strive to invalidate someone else's argument. You could just say, 'I have nothing else to say here' or simply not reply, instead of giving off the air of 'oh, well as I anticipated, you all have devolved into guesswork, I guess I'm just too highbrow for this conversation'.

It's not subjective because it adds a level of in-game attachment to the character that simply is not available to the others. That isn't subjective, it's fact.

I included myself in the "guesswork" phase of my last post. I thought that was pretty clear. I'm guessing; you're guessing. At this point nothing can be done but repeat ourselves over and over, so how about we jsut cut it out?

At this point I'm wondering if this has become personal for you. Are you upset that I called Garrus a disgusting cricket or something?

[ManBearPig91]

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?

Maybe you should go kill yourself?

[ThatDancingTurian]

Not so much personal as just getting irritated, as I tend to do when I start reading arrogance from people. I don't get riled up over virtual characters. People who get into arguments with this weird competitive superiority complex, that kind of grates.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...

Not so much personal as just getting irritated, as I tend to do when I start reading arrogance from people. I don't get riled up over virtual characters. People who get into arguments with this weird competitive superiority complex, that kind of grates.

I like to argue.

But need I point out the apparent irony in your statement here?

[ThatDancingTurian]

What irony? I haven't belittled anyone, nor have I pretended that I -know- what's going to happen, or insinuated that people who disagree with me are following blind hope and not thinking clearly. I've simply attempted to offer a concise rebuttal to an argument.



But since this has delved far past that argument, I'm done here. I've got nothing else to say. Take that as you will.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Aris Ravenstar wrote...

What irony? I haven't belittled anyone, nor have I pretended that I -know- what's going to happen, or insinuated that people who disagree with me are following blind hope and not thinking clearly. I've simply attempted to offer a concise rebuttal to an argument.

But since this has delved far past that argument, I'm done here. I've got nothing else to say. Take that as you will.

I never pretended I knew what was going to happen either, nor have I insinuated that people aren't thinking clearly. All I've done is try to explain my stance with technical evidence from multiple games and BioWare's own track record.

[lyssalu]

i still don't like this "but some people could have died!!!" argument. honestly, who here isn't going to have multiple play throughs of the game where in at least one of them, everyone survives the suicide mission? WHO?!

[Mystranna Kelteel]

lyssalu wrote...

i still don't like this "but some people could have died!!!" argument. honestly, who here isn't going to have multiple play throughs of the game where in at least one of them, everyone survives the suicide mission? WHO?!

I have a save file where I specifically want people to die for the effect of it. For others it's a matter of not wanting to play through multiple times for specific mistakes.

What you say here is akin to saying, "Who here isn't going to have a playthrough where Wrex survives?

[lyssalu]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

lyssalu wrote...

i still don't like this "but some people could have died!!!" argument. honestly, who here isn't going to have multiple play throughs of the game where in at least one of them, everyone survives the suicide mission? WHO?!

I have a save file where I specifically want people to die for the effect of it. For others it's a matter of not wanting to play through multiple times for specific mistakes.

What you say here is akin to saying, "Who here isn't going to have a playthrough where Wrex survives?

actually, that's my point.  i have a playthrough where he survives and one where he lives because i wanted to see the repercussion of those choices carry through to the next game.    that's my point, precisely.  that's why i think reducing certain squadmembers to cameo appearances because they could have died was shoddy reasoning, when the real basis for doing so was to make room for (potentially) more interesting and powerful characters.

hence why liara wasn't a squad member in me2 and garrus was even though you could have left him at the citadel if you wanted to.  furthermore, it's highly likely that even though kaidan and ashley are dead for some people, they're returning to me3 as more than cameos.

[Mox Ruuga]

Thank god Tali and Garrus had their character shields removed.

In a way, I think Bioware intentionally tied their own hands there. Just to keep some suit from walking up and forcing them to alter the plot because of an online storm about the dead quarian fetish object.