50907 réponses à ce sujet

[Erinlana]

Master Wolf wrote...

jlb524 wrote...

I am very curious what they will do with her...I just want her baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!!!

Her becoming the SB may not happen, wouldn't fit with her personality or make sense., but I still think it would be incredibly sexy.

I also just want her back with Shepard.

And Liara is always incredibly sexy.

That is an understatement !  Liara is always the sexiest !:wub:

Modifié par Erinlana, 30 juin 2010 - 08:26 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

I just hope Liara gets to be back in the same role as that she occupied in ME1: someone with in depth knowledge that Shepard needs on his overall mission.

Rather than assume the SBs position, I just hope her crusade against the SB and current position as an information broker leads her to crucial information to help Shepard in the plot of ME3.

I think its pretty much guaranteed ME3 wont follow ME2s ****** poor plot of "complete this shopping list and throw yourself at the main problem". Its going to possibly be back to ME1s mystery solving style, where you actually need to DISCOVER and LEARN things, not do favours and gather mission resources for a half hour underwhelming suicide mission.

I just hope the SB is one of those "stepping stones" in the overarching mystery, and thats where Liara comes in, as a squadmate.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 30 juin 2010 - 08:33 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

LesEnfantsTerribles wrote...

Yeah. Like I said, the only way I could ever see her believeably wanting to assume the SB's position of power is if she feels she could do good with it, and remove what is considered to be an evil of galactic politics. That is, she wants to completely reform the entire information network and transform it into something more benevolent. Anything else? No, not believeable at all. Why would she want to assume the position of something she hates and found utterly abhorrent, without changing it?

What's most believeable for her character is that she neutralises the SB, and then goes back with Shepard. Simple as that.

Yeah but you see LET, the SB is already nuetral. All Liara would accomplish by doing what you suggest is ruining the SB network, and bringing about the chaos that the SB currently prevents.

Liaras "desire to do good" would drive away probably 90% of the SBs clients, who would simply go about their own methods to learn others secrets.

I think its important to learn the motive behind why the SB does what it does, before assuming Liara could run it better, since right now she as an individual is incapable of running the SB organisation unless she wants to be dead within a week from exhaustion. There is simply too much that needs to be done too quickly. Even Mordin would be completely worthless taking on the SBs role.

[Master Wolf]

LesEnfantsTerribles wrote...

I meant neutralise him in terms of removing or killing him, silly. Not turning him neutral!

Yeah, the SB's current network is far too vast to manage. I should have clarified that I also meant downsizing it too, grrr!

No need EDI would help her

[Master Wolf]

LesEnfantsTerribles wrote...

EDI is too busy flirting with Joker to help Liara!

This have o good side this means that Joker will also be too busy flirting with EDI to interrupt Separd and Liara when they are in the capitan quarters embracing eternety.

[Marcin K]

going offline overnight, cya all tomorrow

[bjdbwea]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I think its pretty much guaranteed ME3 wont follow ME2s ****** poor plot of "complete this shopping list and throw yourself at the main problem". Its going to possibly be back to ME1s mystery solving style, where you actually need to DISCOVER and LEARN things, not do favours and gather mission resources for a half hour underwhelming suicide mission.

I certainly hope so. But what makes you think it's guaranteed? I'm not so sure, that's also why I wouldn't celebrate yet even if they confirmed Liara to be a companion in ME 3. I would fear that her part could be as mediocre as that of the ME 2 crew. To me it seems that's their new preferred style, as it certainly makes the development easier and quicker.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Marcin R wrote...

going offline overnight, cya all tomorrow

Good night Marcin.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

bjdbwea wrote...

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

I think its pretty much guaranteed ME3 wont follow ME2s ****** poor plot of "complete this shopping list and throw yourself at the main problem". Its going to possibly be back to ME1s mystery solving style, where you actually need to DISCOVER and LEARN things, not do favours and gather mission resources for a half hour underwhelming suicide mission.

I certainly hope so. But what makes you think it's guaranteed? I'm not so sure, that's also why I wouldn't celebrate yet even if they confirmed Liara to be a companion in ME 3. I would fear that her part could be as mediocre as that of the ME 2 crew. To me it seems that's their new preferred style, as it certainly makes the development easier and quicker.

Diffrent way of development? Sure. Easier and quicker? Don't think so. Even if the squadmates only had 3 conversations each, remember there is still 10 originaly. And thats alot of dialog to record.

Also how many hours does it take to complete one ME1 playthrough with with 50-65% of the sidequest complete take?

Didn't it take 15 hours or so?

Modifié par Lizardviking, 30 juin 2010 - 09:17 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

bjdbwea wrote...

I certainly hope so. But what makes you think it's guaranteed? I'm not so sure, that's also why I wouldn't celebrate yet even if they confirmed Liara to be a companion in ME 3. I would fear that her part could be as mediocre as that of the ME 2 crew. To me it seems that's their new preferred style, as it certainly makes the development easier and quicker.

ME2 has such a poor plot because its "character driven". Not in the sense that the characters recieve good development alongside the plot, and are well integrated into it. "Character driven" in the sense that, rather than advancing the overall trilogy, ME2 sidesteps with it basically amounting to nothing more than small, self-contained snippets of character backstory and development contained within small, one off missions linked to the main plot only in that you are "building/solidifying a team".

They simply CANNOT do this again in ME3. I think the entire reason they did it in ME2 is to make their jobs in ME3 easier. They spent the entire second act advancing the plot no further than ME1 did. Now they just have everything they need to wrap it up.

ME is a quite possibly a two part story seperated by a spin off in the middle, with each act almost entirely self contained.

It looks to me like it goes:

ME1: Introduce
ME2: Waste time
ME3: Resolve

Didnt Casey say the ME1 romance is very much like the main story arc? Both of these potentially crucial plots were tucked away safely during ME2, but just before they were, they were reset so that in ME3, they potentially stand up by themselves so that newcomers are basically coming in at the "restart".

I didnt say it was totally guaranteed though. There is of course the chance Bioware will just continue on the downward spiral of crap, and screw it up even further in ME3, with the main plot having an awful resolution, and the ME1 romances just being plot sensitive cameos, instead of "choice altered" cameos.

Thats my speculation at least.

[bjdbwea]

I just try to look at the reasons why ME 2 turned out this way. And I think it's not because the game was supposed to be "character driven" and just failed. Then it could be a one-time lapse.



I rather think the main reasons were a) appealing to a new audience and speeding up development. And I see currently no reason why they would change this approach, unfortunately. Therefore I can only assume that the writing in ME 3 will be treated similarly, and will turn out similarly bad.

[Nerevar-as]

ME2 was Dirty Dozen IN SPACE! (if they do movies following the main plot of the games it is going to be too blatant), but it fulfilled its duty of setting up plot (Reapers are in their way and we have an idea of their goal and origins) and resolution (dark energy here and there) so I´m not that worried about ME3 main plot. I am about the characters, but they may take note from fan dissapointment about character interaction in ME2 and the opposite reaction from DA:O, which should be the reference, ME1 wasn´t that good really, just better than the sequel. I guess it also helped that you could follow the main plot straight, while in 2 you must do lots of missions that feel like sidequests or face the ending consequences.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

bjdbwea wrote...

I just try to look at the reasons why ME 2 turned out this way. And I think it's not because the game was supposed to be "character driven" and just failed. Then it could be a one-time lapse.

I rather think the main reasons were a) appealing to a new audience and speeding up development. And I see currently no reason why they would change this approach, unfortunately. Therefore I can only assume that the writing in ME 3 will be treated similarly, and will turn out similarly bad.

Yeah it could do, but youve got to accept that there will be a fundamental difference in the writing in that it will be the final act of the trilogy. Even if it is a ****** poor excuse for a trilogy, its still one that must bring everything to close in the final act.

ME2 brought nothing significant to close. It just got rid of the newly introduced reaper mook army to waste some time.

Mass Effect 3 cannot unfold the same way as ME2. You cant just have "you need to gather a new team to take the reapers down!" It needs to be driven by events this time -events that resolve some of the unfinished threads so far, ones that ME2 either put away safely, or foreshadowed for ME3 -  not acquiring one expendable character after the other and running their errands for them.

I agree they will most likely have a similar "appeal to the newcomers/shooter fans" mentality, and game will probably suck again because of it. However, there has to be a change from many aspects of ME2, otherwise it just wont work.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 30 juin 2010 - 09:39 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

I just try to look at the reasons why ME 2 turned out this way. And I think it's not because the game was supposed to be "character driven" and just failed. Then it could be a one-time lapse.

I rather think the main reasons were a) appealing to a new audience and speeding up development. And I see currently no reason why they would change this approach, unfortunately. Therefore I can only assume that the writing in ME 3 will be treated similarly, and will turn out similarly bad.

Yeah it could do, but youve got to accept that there will be a fundamental difference in the writing in that it will be the final act of the trilogy. Even if it is a ****** poor excuse for a trilogy, its still one that must bring everything to close in the final act.

ME2 brought nothing significant to close. It just got rid of the newly introduced reaper mook army to waste some time.

Mass Effect 3 cannot unfold the same way as ME2. You cant just have "you need to gather a new team to take the reapers down!" It needs to be driven by events this time -events that resolve some of the unfinished threads so far, ones that ME2 either put away safely, or foreshadowed for ME3 -  not acquiring one expendable character after the other and running their errands for them.

I agree they will most likely have a similar "appeal to the newcomers/shooter fans" mentality, and game will probably suck again because of it. However, there has to be a change from many aspects of ME2, otherwise it just wont work.

Yeah. They have to change to another formula than the one they did in ME2 (which is a good thing). Still my biggest concern is how are they are gonna incorperate the ME2 squadmembers in ME3 and still have an plot-important role. because they could be killed after all.

Bioware really dug themselves into a hole here, since there are only two ways out:

A: Bioware really does mean that "actions have consequences" and losing a ME2 squadmember will handicap you in the third game to the said squadmembers having plot important roles. If this is the case then I wonder why they couldn't just add Liara Ashley/kaidan in ME2.

B: The ME2 cast really was expendable and quite useless in ME3. If this is the case then ME2 would be completly redundant.

[Master Wolf]

Lizardviking wrote...
B: The ME2 cast really was expendable and quite useless in ME3. If this is the case then ME2 would be completly redundant.

I think that this will be the case like I said before all (almost all) ME2 squadmates have reasons that can be used to keep tham out of ME3, it will also reduce the variables in ME3. IMO the only characters that can have plot significance in ME3 are Liara and the virmire survivor.

Modifié par Master Wolf, 30 juin 2010 - 09:54 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Lizardviking wrote...

Yeah. They have to change to another formula than the one they did in ME2 (which is a good thing). Still my biggest concern is how are they are gonna incorperate the ME2 squadmembers in ME3 and still have an plot-important role. because they could be killed after all.

Bioware really dug themselves into a hole here, since there are only two ways out:

A: Bioware really does mean that "actions have consequences" and losing a ME2 squadmember will handicap you in the third game to the said squadmembers having plot important roles. If this is the case then I wonder why they couldn't just add Liara Ashley/kaidan in ME2.

B: The ME2 cast really was expendable and quite useless in ME3. If this is the case then ME2 would be completly redundant.

I wouldnt count on any more than one or two of the ME2 squad MAYBE staying as squadmates.

The rest might just take similar roles to Wrex, as plot based supporting characters who can easily be replaced by a clone character.

Thats the way they will have to operate. They cannot commit too heavily to these characters, because the variables of if they are alive or dead drastically change the game, and it starts to get a ridiculous.

As my once joking, now serious sig points out, I support cameo roles for most if not all of the ME2 squad.

Fairly small roles that can be significantly altered by your decisions. How you handled these characters personal missions or if you romanced them can lead to drastically different, but still small and easily contained cameos.

But its far too much to expect a heavy showing from most of these characters. Getting too involved with 12 character who could not only be dead for many folks, but never even met gets logistically ridiculous VERY fast.

I think at best, I speculate that Bioware might examine data to determine who the most used/often survived character is and possibly, like Ashley/Kaidan currently look to be, created a mirror squadmate of two characters, one role.

Again though, thats double the voicework, double all of the effort just for one character, and every single ME2 squadmate faces that problem.

Ill give Bioware credit, the suicide mission may have been underwhelming, but they certainly were not kidding when they emphasised how variable squadmate deaths could be. I remember assuming it would be a very railroaded affair, but they proved me wrong.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 30 juin 2010 - 09:57 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Yeah. They have to change to another formula than the one they did in ME2 (which is a good thing). Still my biggest concern is how are they are gonna incorperate the ME2 squadmembers in ME3 and still have an plot-important role. because they could be killed after all.

Bioware really dug themselves into a hole here, since there are only two ways out:

A: Bioware really does mean that "actions have consequences" and losing a ME2 squadmember will handicap you in the third game to the said squadmembers having plot important roles. If this is the case then I wonder why they couldn't just add Liara Ashley/kaidan in ME2.

B: The ME2 cast really was expendable and quite useless in ME3. If this is the case then ME2 would be completly redundant.

I wouldnt count on any more than one or two of the ME2 squad MAYBE staying as squadmates.

The rest might just take similar roles to Wrex, as plot based supporting characters who can easily be replaced by a clone character.

Thats the way they will have to operate. They cannot commit too heavily to these characters, because the variables of if they are alive or dead drastically change the game, and it starts to get a ridiculous.

As my once joking, now serious sig points out, I support cameo roles for most if not all of the ME2 squad.

Fairly small roles that can be significantly altered by your decisions. How you handled these characters personal missions or if you romanced them can lead to drastically different, but still small and easily contained cameos.

But its far too much to expect a heavy showing from most of these characters. Getting too involved with 12 character who could not only be dead for many folks, but never even met gets logistically ridiculous VERY fast.

I think at best, I speculate that Bioware might examine data to determine who the most used/often survived character is and possibly, like Ashley/Kaidan currently look to be, created a mirror squadmate of two characters, one role.

Again though, thats double the voicework, double all of the effort just for one character, and every single ME2 squadmate faces that problem.

Ill give Bioware credit, the suicide mission may have been underwhelming, but they certainly were not kidding when they emphasised how variable squadmate deaths could be. I remember assuming it would be a very railroaded affair, but they proved me wrong.

Wrex like roles hmmm? I forgot that option. And you know what? You might be right, the ME2 characters simply have WAAY too many varibles that thinking all of the squadmates will return. I would already bet on that Thane, Jack, Samara and Mordin are gonna get cameo'd.

But I also hope that 2-4 will return as squadmates, preferbly Garrus and Tali. If only because that would make some small part of my original vision of the mass effect trilogy true.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Lizardviking wrote...

Wrex like roles hmmm? I forgot that option. And you know what? You might be right, the ME2 characters simply have WAAY too many varibles that thinking all of the squadmates will return. I would already bet on that Thane, Jack, Samara and Mordin are gonna get cameo'd.

But I also hope that 2-4 will return as squadmates, preferbly Garrus and Tali. If only because that would make some small part of my original vision of the mass effect trilogy true.

I will say before I go, Im sorry but Tali and Garrus are foremost on my "want to be cameod" list.

We were told the ME1 LIs were being left out of ME2 because they were "saved for ME3"/"too important to potentially die on the suicide mission".

If Tali and Garrus are in all three games, its insulting to us fans who had to endure the ME1 LIs absence from ME2 in almost its entirety, just so that they could get a role in ME3 everyone will see, rather than a bonus role.

I personally hope Tali and Garrus take up roles in any turian/quarian species encounter in ME3, and like I said if they are dead, Tali'Zorah is replaced Xavi'Noruh and Garrus is replaced by Vorrus or something silly like that, ala Wrex/Wreav.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 30 juin 2010 - 10:07 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Wrex like roles hmmm? I forgot that option. And you know what? You might be right, the ME2 characters simply have WAAY too many varibles that thinking all of the squadmates will return. I would already bet on that Thane, Jack, Samara and Mordin are gonna get cameo'd.

But I also hope that 2-4 will return as squadmates, preferbly Garrus and Tali. If only because that would make some small part of my original vision of the mass effect trilogy true.

I will say before I go, Im sorry but Tali and Garrus are foremost on my "want to be cameod" list.

We were told the ME1 LIs were being left out of ME2 because they were "saved for ME3"/"too important to potentially die on the suicide mission".

If Tali and Garrus are in all three games, its insulting to us fans who had to endure their absence from ME2 in almost its entirety, just so that they could get a role in ME3 everyone will see, rather than a bonus role.

I personally hope Tali and Garrus take up roles in any turian/quarian species encounter in ME3, and like I said, if they are dead, Tali'Zorah is replaced Xavi'Noruh and Garrus is replaced by Vorrus or something, ala Wrex/Wreav.

While I can understand your point of view, you still have to understand Garrus is pretty much the ONLY character of the ME2 cast who has no reason to leave Shepard even if not romanced. Also he is not in a position of power in any faction unlike Tali, another reason I think hes gonna stay abord.