367 réponses à ce sujet

[Computron2000]

Regarding the business side decisions, please also remember that back sales of the older ME1 and ME2 in the trilogy is likely a consideration in marketing terms.

By smartly tying everything up together, you create awareness and curiosity of new ME3 players for ME1 and ME2. This of course is dependent on the new players being enthralled by ME3. The bait here is the decision making process that affects each later part. This is not found (AFAIK) in any other game with sequels

Modifié par Computron2000, 24 février 2010 - 08:26 .

[Mister_Tez]

I've not read the whole thread, and I'm sure that a lot of this has probably already been said.

Still, here are my thoughts...

I do not see why the majority of your (surviving) ME2 team cannot be part of your team in ME3.

They don't need to have a full set of replacement team members for each ME2 team member who may have died - just a few extra people to recruit, in addition to any survivors who stay with you. If you kept the whole team alive, awesome. If you were a muppet & lost all but two, then tough - you have to make do with a final squad of e.g. six only.

I think "dire consequences" should not just be regarding the presumably obvious choices (Collector Base, Heretics, etc.), but also regarding your team's survivors. So if you screwed up at the end of ME2, then it hobbles you for ME3 by restricting your team size & variety. I don't see why I should be penalised (by not keeping ME2 teammates in ME3) for acing the suicide mission - people who screwed up should be penalised (come on, it's not hard to buy upgrades & pick the correct specialists!).

People talk about too much dialogue, too much voice acting being needed... how so?



You have 11 team mates in ME2. The voice actor for each one had to
record dialogue for every single mission that their character could be
used in, plus unique dialogue for their own recruitment mission, plus
unique dialogue for their own loyalty mission, plus Normandy dialogue.



If your ME2 team carries over into ME3, you do not need to recruit them
again, you do not need to make them loyal again. So the only dialogue
needed is the standard dialogue for each mission same as with ME2
(in-mission chatter, cutscene dialogue), plus dialogue for any
post-mission chats on the Normandy. Less dialogue needed than ME2.

The minimum no. of suicide mission survivors possible for Shepard to still survive is two. Assume that there will be some
recruitment in ME3, of say four characters to bring the squad to six
(minimum), the same squad size as ME1. Those four could be Liara,
Ashley/Kaiden, and two new people. Each of those could have a
recruitment mission and a loyalty mission, so would need dialogue for
those as well as the standard dialogue for each mission they can be
used on.

Even with general in-mission cutscene dialogue for the existing ME2 team + the new recruits, and recruitment + loyalty mission dialogue for the new recruits, that's not excessive compared to ME2, due to there being fewer recruitment & loyalty missions than in ME2.

And the surviving team can always be trimmed to a more manageable number by writing out a few of the obvious ones e.g. Thane due to him being terminally ill, e.g. Samara due to her oath being fulfilled, etc.

OK, so it has been said that the ME2 team are expendable & do not have any strong ties with ME3's story (as they can all die, obviously)... but I think in a way that makes it easier to use them in ME3... if they have no strong links to the story, then all the various dead/survived combinations won't complicate things, as any survivors can simply be potential squadmates & won't have any direct impact on the story. Whoever survived, in whichever combination, won't affect the story so there is no complication.

ME2 was about team building & character development. ME3 should be plot development & EPIC TRILOGY FINALE. You shouldn't have to go around recruiting & making loyal yet another squad of ultimate badasses, it should IMO just be a case of ME2 survivors + a few extras, and then off you go on a major set of story missions.

And of course seeing as ME2 was about team building & character development, it would be so utterly stupid IMO if those characters then simply got tossed away in ME3, by whatever means, after all that your Shepard had been through with them. BioWare surely cannot have gone into making ME2 not realising that people would grow attached to certain team members & want to keep them with them in the final game, given that most of the game is spent recruiting people & making them loyal.

If, after all you have been through in ME2, you have to start over again in ME3, then what was the point? Why bother having the middle game being about team building & character development if those characters are then discarded in the final game? Why even bother keeping your team alive in the suicide mission if they're going to be reduced to cameos in ME3?

[Ecael]

Lvl20DM wrote...

It's silly to speculate, but I really think that none of your ME 2 squad will be in your squad in ME 3. It's not just a matter of resources. It would hurt the game. Part of what makes these games great is getting to know your squad and introducing new characters. These characters allow the writers to explore different aspects of the universe they have create. Samara gives us a new type of Asari to interact with and introduces the justicars. Thane is a "new" race. Grunt is a very different Krogan from Wrex. Without new squad-mates we miss out on this very important part of story-telling. A rigid Turian that distrusts humanity would give us a new perspective on that race. A female Krogan engineer would put yet another spin on that species, and so on.

Getting to know your squad by adding new characters and completely doing away with the old ones is a little self-defeating.

Again, I need to reiterate that the most probable solution will be to have half of these old squadmates return, and this half will be part of the canon ME3 Shepard. The other half will be entirely new characters. If those returning squadmates are dead in your import, they stay dead. No one needs to necessarily replace them.

Having none of the characters return as squadmates would hurt the game the most - just as much as having ALL of the characters return. Why? Because BioWare will be compelled to put 14+ new squadmates in ME3 just to trump their last game, forcing you to spend 95% of the game recruiting them (and probably gaining their loyalty or doing their side-quests to get to know them better/gain that race's allies). Then you enter some secret relay to dark space and have Shepard spend 1 or 2 hours of gameplay in the Reaper base to upload a virus. The Reapers die, the game's plot dies, The End.

While it's possible to have a story with good plot and character development, Mass Effect 2 is basically all character development with 12 squadmates. If Mass Effect 3 is going to require the same kind of recruiting, then the main plot is going to be non-existent, and the ending is going to feel rushed.

Modifié par Ecael, 24 février 2010 - 08:46 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Mister_Tez wrote...
....
....

And of course seeing as ME2 was about team building & character development, it would be so utterly stupid IMO if those characters then simply got tossed away in ME3, by whatever means, after all that your Shepard had been through with them. BioWare surely cannot have gone into making ME2 not realising that people would grow attached to certain team members & want to keep them with them in the final game, given that most of the game is spent recruiting people & making them loyal.

If, after all you have been through in ME2, you have to start over again in ME3, then what was the point? Why bother having the middle game being about team building & character development if those characters are then discarded in the final game? Why even bother keeping your team alive in the suicide mission if they're going to be reduced to cameos in ME3?

Just one thing. In Mass Effect One there were no such crap thing as recruitment/loyalty missions. The closest thing was Liara's rescue mission, but Liara was needed plotwise -- specifically to recognize Ilos in Shepard's vision. And anyway the mission was so short and straight and focused on Liara because it got cut for budget issues!

The plot of the main story (Shepard vs. Reapers) must be so intense in ME3, that nobody notices if some squadmates are not developed deeply.

BTW, when I used up all the dialogue in ME2 for Garrus, it felt kinda odd that he wouldn't want to talk to me, about the "old days", about weather on Palaven, about what the hell it is that takes him half a game to calibrate... So I ended up a little dissapointed about how Garrus was treated. On the other hand, Liara and Ashley were all about their business and I kinda had no time for "small talk" with them, because I was all about mine. Thus, no dissappointment about their "character development".

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 24 février 2010 - 09:00 .

[Lvl20DM]

I think that it's probable that Liara and Ashley/Kaiden actually join your squad in ME 3. They were held back from the suicide mission for a reason. At the very least they have an important story to tell that involves those characters.



I don't see how getting a new squad for ME 3 makes ME 2 pointless. The purpose of recruiting that squad was to journey through the Omega-4 Relay and stop the Collectors. ME 3 will be a different game with a different goal.



The characters from ME 2 do not have to be in your squad to have important roles in the final game. For example, ME 3 could have a mission involving important medical research (a genophage cure, etc.). If you played through in ME 2 and kept him alive, Mordin is the head of that research. If not, it's another scientist. Again, I think that popularity will play a large role in which how important these characters are in the next game.



I will admit that Legion is a possible candidate for Shep's squad in ME 3. Even if he dies, a number of explanations can be made for him returning.

[StaR_JeS]

IMHO, I think that if ME2 squaddies are not included in ME3 then all that work I put in in keeping them happy and gaining their trust will be for naught. And I will be peeved. I am quite attached in some capacity to every single one of them.



I also think it would be stupid if the choices you make (i.e. getting squaddies killed) do not carry over and they replace characters with some dumb old NPC. Seriously. Take responsibility for your actions all you callous Shepards! You got Tali killed, so now it's your fault if the quarians don't join your quest in eradicating the Reapers...

[redguppie]

At this point having to recruit another group would be just tedious to
me. Also story wise how do you write something that in any way makes
getting a new group make sense. You had a diverse group from me1 plus
you recruited the BEST in me2, who else do you really need?



Keep
something in mind, to get you this new group they had to kill you and
destroy the Normandy. If they wanted to build another whole new group
they have to basically kill you again because as long as your alive
most are sticking with you. I also don't see the devs wasting disk
space building back stories for another group when that would already
be taken care of by the previous 2 games. you got to figure that most
people who are going to buy 3 have already played at least ME2 but most
likely both(I know there will be a few that will buy the third brand
new to the series but there is no way you can logically assume that
will be the mojority) and already have a vested interest in the
characters that are already here.



Another reason I
believe they will use most of the same people is a time issue. From
everything I've read they plan on getting ME3 out quicker than ME2 came
out. If that is the case it would be easier to use the already
developed characters because all the work is pretty much done with
them. They don't have to figure out the looks, build the computer
models, find the voice actors, and write a back story. If they used the
same characters all they would have to do would spend some time
furthering the development(something they would have to do anyway to
satisfy fans regarding the romantic subplots) instead of building from
scratch. Heck you spent most of ME2 finding a team and getting to know
them through the loyalty mission, are they planning on making you spend
most of the third game getting you a new team and making you care about
them as well.

The third game has to focus on the main plot because there is nothing beyond  for this story. This is not three different stories but instead three parts of the same STORY.  name one trilogy were in the last part they decided to religate all the people besides the main character to two bit parts? 

bottom line Bioware knows how to make the most money on this trilog and it doesn't involve being stupid at the end, and inventing a squad of redshirts( adding new people at the end would be this) that they won't have enough time to flesh out is two levels below retarded

[Ecael]

Lvl20DM wrote...

I don't see how getting a new squad for ME 3 makes ME 2 pointless. The
purpose of recruiting that squad was to journey through the Omega-4
Relay and stop the Collectors. ME 3 will be a different game with a
different goal.

An entirely new squad for ME3 doesn't make ME2 pointless, it makes ME3 pointless. We'll all be so caught up in recruiting 14+ allies again that there will be no content for the main plot. And BioWare will justify loyalty missions or side-quests again as a form of character development for each of those 14 allies.

You won't be able to recruit 14 allies the same way ME1 recuited allies unless there was a massive coincidence that Shepard and all 14 squadmates happened to show up at the same inter-species bachelor party on Illium or the Citadel.

[Nozybidaj]

Lvl20DM wrote...
I don't see how getting a new squad for ME 3 makes ME 2 pointless. The purpose of recruiting that squad was to journey through the Omega-4 Relay and stop the Collectors. ME 3 will be a different game with a different goal.

This.  The people we recruited in ME2 we recruited for a specific purpose and goal.  That goal has been achieved. 

There are lots of reasons most of these folks wouldn't be "sticking around", they all have their own lives and goals, why would it make any sense for them to just sit around on the Normandy?

I also find it rather humorous how you can take almost every argument in the thread change "2" with "1" and "3" with "2" and get the same arguments that were hashed over prior to ME2 being released.

[redguppie]

Nozybidaj wrote...

Lvl20DM wrote...
I don't see how getting a new squad for ME 3 makes ME 2 pointless. The purpose of recruiting that squad was to journey through the Omega-4 Relay and stop the Collectors. ME 3 will be a different game with a different goal.

This.  The people we recruited in ME2 we recruited for a specific purpose and goal.  That goal has been achieved. 

There are lots of reasons most of these folks wouldn't be "sticking around", they all have their own lives and goals, why would it make any sense for them to just sit around on the Normandy?

I also find it rather humorous how you can take almost every argument in the thread change "2" with "1" and "3" with "2" and get the same arguments that were hashed over prior to ME2 being released.

you mean all those life problems that are totally more important than the reaper problem right?  

And you keep bringing up the transition from 1 to 2 like it is some formula that they have to follow to get from 2 to 3, why?   The did that to give a reason to bring in this crew of people because otherwise why would Sheppard be team hunting, he would already have one.  the big difference between 2 and three is the fact that 2 is simply a bridge to get from 1 to 3. Three itself will be an entirely different creature and to expect them to be the same storywise is foolish.

[Ecael]

Nozybidaj wrote...

This.  The people we recruited in ME2 we recruited for a specific purpose and goal.  That goal has been achieved. 

There are lots of reasons most of these folks wouldn't be "sticking around", they all have their own lives and goals, why would it make any sense for them to just sit around on the Normandy?

Because they've seen what the Reapers (or at least the minions of the Reapers) are capable of doing? It's rather obvious to anyone who's been inside the Normandy that the galaxy is at stake, so why does Shepard have to fix the problem himself?

Trillions of lives are at stake and the entire galaxy will fall, and people have better things to do? Hardly anyone else believes that the Reapers exist because they haven't seen evidence face-to-face, so it's up to them and ONLY up to them.

The only way they'd leave is if they're permanently dead (in everyone's playthrough), they're going to be eventually dead, or if they believe that Shepard is dead. Garrus, Tali, Wrex and Liara all took up suicidal tasks and missions after they found out Shepard didn't make it - after all, the galaxy is going to end without him. Ashley/Kaidan continued working for the Alliance to find more evidence of the Reapers/missing colonies, but without a leader and a team that believes the Reapers exist, this is an almost pointless effort.

[InHarmsWay]

Mister_Tez wrote...

I've not read the whole thread, and I'm sure that a lot of this has probably already been said.

Still, here are my thoughts...

I do not see why the majority of your (surviving) ME2 team cannot be part of your team in ME3.

They don't need to have a full set of replacement team members for each ME2 team member who may have died - just a few extra people to recruit, in addition to any survivors who stay with you. If you kept the whole team alive, awesome. If you were a muppet & lost all but two, then tough - you have to make do with a final squad of e.g. six only.

I think "dire consequences" should not just be regarding the presumably obvious choices (Collector Base, Heretics, etc.), but also regarding your team's survivors. So if you screwed up at the end of ME2, then it hobbles you for ME3 by restricting your team size & variety. I don't see why I should be penalised (by not keeping ME2 teammates in ME3) for acing the suicide mission - people who screwed up should be penalised (come on, it's not hard to buy upgrades & pick the correct specialists!).

People talk about too much dialogue, too much voice acting being needed... how so?



You have 11 team mates in ME2. The voice actor for each one had to
record dialogue for every single mission that their character could be
used in, plus unique dialogue for their own recruitment mission, plus
unique dialogue for their own loyalty mission, plus Normandy dialogue.



If your ME2 team carries over into ME3, you do not need to recruit them
again, you do not need to make them loyal again. So the only dialogue
needed is the standard dialogue for each mission same as with ME2
(in-mission chatter, cutscene dialogue), plus dialogue for any
post-mission chats on the Normandy. Less dialogue needed than ME2.

The minimum no. of suicide mission survivors possible for Shepard to still survive is two. Assume that there will be some
recruitment in ME3, of say four characters to bring the squad to six
(minimum), the same squad size as ME1. Those four could be Liara,
Ashley/Kaiden, and two new people. Each of those could have a
recruitment mission and a loyalty mission, so would need dialogue for
those as well as the standard dialogue for each mission they can be
used on.

Even with general in-mission cutscene dialogue for the existing ME2 team + the new recruits, and recruitment + loyalty mission dialogue for the new recruits, that's not excessive compared to ME2, due to there being fewer recruitment & loyalty missions than in ME2.

And the surviving team can always be trimmed to a more manageable number by writing out a few of the obvious ones e.g. Thane due to him being terminally ill, e.g. Samara due to her oath being fulfilled, etc.

OK, so it has been said that the ME2 team are expendable & do not have any strong ties with ME3's story (as they can all die, obviously)... but I think in a way that makes it easier to use them in ME3... if they have no strong links to the story, then all the various dead/survived combinations won't complicate things, as any survivors can simply be potential squadmates & won't have any direct impact on the story. Whoever survived, in whichever combination, won't affect the story so there is no complication.

ME2 was about team building & character development. ME3 should be plot development & EPIC TRILOGY FINALE. You shouldn't have to go around recruiting & making loyal yet another squad of ultimate badasses, it should IMO just be a case of ME2 survivors + a few extras, and then off you go on a major set of story missions.

And of course seeing as ME2 was about team building & character development, it would be so utterly stupid IMO if those characters then simply got tossed away in ME3, by whatever means, after all that your Shepard had been through with them. BioWare surely cannot have gone into making ME2 not realising that people would grow attached to certain team members & want to keep them with them in the final game, given that most of the game is spent recruiting people & making them loyal.

If, after all you have been through in ME2, you have to start over again in ME3, then what was the point? Why bother having the middle game being about team building & character development if those characters are then discarded in the final game? Why even bother keeping your team alive in the suicide mission if they're going to be reduced to cameos in ME3?

This is the best reasoning for returning ME2 squadmates. Players need to know that there are consequences to their actions. What better consequence than "if you play sloppy people die, so now you have a limited amount of squad members". I'm still on the fence about Mordin and Thane. Depending how long ME3 takes place after ME2 (no longer than 2 years), they could be dead by natural causes by then.

[CROAT_56]

I am sorry if this has been mentioned before not reading through 11 pages but all the people that say it would be to expensive to get all the VAs back from ME2.  Bioware is published By EA one of the highest grossing video game companies of all time.  I dont think that money is an issue and EA also loves big name games because ME3 will make a lot of Money they will invest a lot of money. 
Its simple really people who say that there is not enough time and recources don't really have a good arguement honestly does anyone do research.  also BW said that they are gonna use the same engine in ME3 as ME2 leaving all there time for writing and programing so two years is more then enough time to bring all the charecters back frome ME1 and ME2 in large roles.  ie.  Squad Mates

Modifié par CROAT_56, 24 février 2010 - 10:59 .

[Revya]

I want them back since I worked hard to get them all thru the mission alive.



It would be a slap in the face to see all the hard work go down the drain and Bioware favor "again" the people that did not buy the game.

[CROAT_56]

i said it before, if someone is buying the game in the third installment and hasen't played the first two knowing that ME1 and 2s decisions carry over they got something wrong in the head

and yes i believe if you were to lazy to get your whole squad out alive (did it on my first playthrough) then yes you should feal the consequences of your actions in the third instalment i wouldn't mind maybe one to three new charecters ie a Hanar, a Elcor, and a Female Turrian for my boy Gerrus

Modifié par CROAT_56, 24 février 2010 - 11:28 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Revya wrote...

I want them back since I worked hard to get them all thru the mission alive.

All you had to do was to read an unofficial "suicide mission" guide on this forum, or on Wiki. Worked hard, my arse!

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 24 février 2010 - 11:26 .

[Collider]

This is what I posted in another thread.

Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 required a lot of work. Making games
isn't easy - especially with such quality involved in Mass Effect and
Mass Effect 2. So in that way, the argument about it requiring much
work isn't quite as potent. We also do not need to have replacement
squad mates for every - or any - squad mate that died. We don't need a
new recruitable Krogan if Wrex died. In regards to the possible
casualties that may have occured during the suicide mission, they can
just do as they did with Wrex. Instead of Wrex having a certain
position, another NPC Krogan can have it. It is rather absurd to make
entirely new squadmates just for the people who lost x squadmates.

To
survive the suicide mission, you need at the very least two other squad
mates to survive. Ashley/Kaidan and Liara are shoe-ins as squad mates
in ME3, so then you've at least 4 squad mates to use, assuming the ME2
ones are to return. That alone gives you double what you need for a
mission. Add Wrex and that's 5, which is one short of the number in
ME1. Also factor in a couple new squad mates, and that's 7 minimum.

It appears to be easier to use existing characters as
squad mates rather than creating new ones. New characters need concept
art, textures, models, animation, personalities, backstories, story
roles, voice actors, dialogue, you name it. Existing squad mates
already have all that - and it is especially important considering
Bioware plans to reuse much of the resources in ME2 for ME3.

Since
ME2 was all about having your squad mates survive, the suicide mission
would be reduced to a pitiful gimmick if none of your squad mates
returned. If they only return as cameos or not at all, then it is also
as if the suicide mission never happened, it is like it doesn't matter.


Mass Effect 3 is the last in the trilogy, and Bioware no longer
as to (foreseeably) worry about importing - that is they don't need to
worry about how to manage ME3 save files into ME4. They can give us
tons of choices that entangle with eachother, so many choices that if
you could import ME3 to something else, it could potentially be a
logistical nightmare. But since it's the end of the trilogy they can go
all out. It doesn't make much sense for Bioware to develop such deep
characters, many of which are beloved by the fans, and just delegate
them to cameos or have them disappear inexplicably.

[CROAT_56]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Revya wrote...

I want them back since I worked hard to get them all thru the mission alive.

All you had to do was to read an unofficial "suicide mission" guide on this forum, or on Wiki. Worked hard, my arse!

some of us didn't read the guides AKA we didn't cheat so yea maybe they did work hard. 

Personaly it wasn't difficult but took so brains and knowning your crews strengths and weaknesses

[Goat_Shepard]

Only squadmembers that are leaving are Samara (code), Thane (dying), Zaeed (merc for hire), MAYBE Jack (said she was gunna split), MAYBE Mordin (age). Anyways, this leaves enough room for the ME1 squaddies to return. I'm not optimistic about how ME3 "ties everything together", but at least they'll have most of the ME2 squad.



If not, it will be very difficult to buy this game unless they pull something wicked awesome off.

[Nozybidaj]

redguppie wrote...

And you keep bringing up the transition from 1 to 2 like it is some formula that they have to follow to get from 2 to 3, why?   The did that to give a reason to bring in this crew of people because otherwise why would Sheppard be team hunting, he would already have one.

Exactly my point, Shepard already had a team, why spend all of the second part hunting for a new one?  Does it really make sense from a story telling stand point to spend the entirity of the first two chapters of your trilogy doing nothing but new character introductions?

No, but they did it anyway because BW said so.  Look at what BW does, they took a highly successful game with great characters that were loved by the fans and completely cast them aside for the sole purpose of introducing new ones whether it made sense or not.  Look at DA:O Awakenings, same thing there, they created a great cast that people loved and forgot about them in the Expansion," the expansion" not even an entirely new game in the series.

I see no reason to believe BW won't do the same thing in ME3, its just what they do.  They have a formula down for how they create new characters for each installment, they don't do character development and continuity across chapters of the series.

You may not like it, I certainly didn't in ME2, but I am just preparing you for the fact that Tali, and Miranda, and Thane, and Grunt, and all these other great characters that people love now can be easily tossed aside into cameo land by BW without even giving it a second thought, no matter how much you are going to hate it.

[CROAT_56]

i agree with Goat_Shepard

At Nozybidaj then they wont be making much money come number three there are over 40,000 posts in three threads of We love Tali thats a lot of posts which in turn i believe is a lot more fans then Wrex had in ME1.  I think if they reduce some extremely loved charecters to Cameo that not only will there ME3 be a du but there would be a lynch mob of Tali, Thane, Grunt, and whoever else fans outside there building.  and like i said they have the full bakcking of EA so there is no money issues and there using the same engine as ME2 so thats two years of just working on ME3 not building the game from scratch again

also DA:O i never played so i wouldn't know but i don't think that they will copy something they did for an expansion pack to a full fledged game IMO

Modifié par CROAT_56, 24 février 2010 - 11:51 .

[Collider]

Nozybidaj wrote...

???
There are ONLY two games in the Mass Effect trilogy released. And Bioware has already made it clear they sidelined the ME1 characters aside from Tali and Garrus so they can survive to be squad mates in ME3.

Modifié par Collider, 24 février 2010 - 11:39 .

[Goat_Shepard]

Nozybidaj wrote...

redguppie wrote...

And you keep bringing up the transition from 1 to 2 like it is some formula that they have to follow to get from 2 to 3, why?   The did that to give a reason to bring in this crew of people because otherwise why would Sheppard be team hunting, he would already have one.

Exactly my point, Shepard already had a team, why spend all of the second part hunting for a new one?  Does it really make sense from a story telling stand point to spend the entirity of the first two chapters of your trilogy doing nothing but new character introductions?

No, but they did it anyway because BW said so.  Look at what BW does, they took a highly successful game with great characters that were loved by the fans and completely cast them aside for the sole purpose of introducing new ones whether it made sense or not.  Look at DA:O Awakenings, same thing there, they created a great cast that people loved and forgot about them in the Expansion," the expansion" not even an entirely new game in the series.

I see no reason to believe BW won't do the same thing in ME3, its just what they do.  They have a formula down for how they create new characters for each installment, they don't do character development and continuity across chapters of the series.

You may not like it, I certainly didn't in ME2, but I am just preparing you for the fact that Tali, and Miranda, and Thane, and Grunt, and all these other great characters that people love now can be easily tossed aside into cameo land by BW without even giving it a second thought, no matter how much you are going to hate it.

I hate that you could be right. The minute I get confirmation that ME2 characters are reduced to cameos, I am OUTA HERE!

[Goat_Shepard]

CROAT_56 wrote...

i agree with Goat_Shepard

That is borderline sarcasm. "Yes I agree with the Goat!".

So Samara is replaced by Liara, Thane replaced by Ashley/Kaiden? Sounds simple.

Also, is it easier to create(write) a brand new NPC and background, or to write new stuff for a predefined NPC? 

[Default137]

Nozybidaj wrote...

redguppie wrote...

And you keep bringing up the transition from 1 to 2 like it is some formula that they have to follow to get from 2 to 3, why?   The did that to give a reason to bring in this crew of people because otherwise why would Sheppard be team hunting, he would already have one.

Exactly my point, Shepard already had a team, why spend all of the second part hunting for a new one?  Does it really make sense from a story telling stand point to spend the entirity of the first two chapters of your trilogy doing nothing but new character introductions?

No, but they did it anyway because BW said so.  Look at what BW does, they took a highly successful game with great characters that were loved by the fans and completely cast them aside for the sole purpose of introducing new ones whether it made sense or not.  Look at DA:O Awakenings, same thing there, they created a great cast that people loved and forgot about them in the Expansion," the expansion" not even an entirely new game in the series.

I see no reason to believe BW won't do the same thing in ME3, its just what they do.  They have a formula down for how they create new characters for each installment, they don't do character development and continuity across chapters of the series.

You may not like it, I certainly didn't in ME2, but I am just preparing you for the fact that Tali, and Miranda, and Thane, and Grunt, and all these other great characters that people love now can be easily tossed aside into cameo land by BW without even giving it a second thought, no matter how much you are going to hate it.

Actually lets take a loog over Biowares history to try and see their formula.

Baldurs Gate -  Oh look, 50-75% of the team is back for another run, and all the survivors are back for the godfight.

Neverwinter Nights - Deekin, few others, all came back.

KotOR - 2 wasn't made by Bioware

Dragon Age - Small budget, but even then, at least one person is coming back, most of the rest can't come back for personal reasons, rather then budget reasons.

Mass Effect - half the squad came back.

So uh, why would Bioware break their strategy again? Every game they've made, all the people who make sense to come back do, while those who have plot reasons to stay out of the party stay out of the party, there is no real evidence suggesting that Bioware has always been a company to throw out the old team to make everyone be cameos, as I said, even with Mass Effect, 50% of your old team stays onboard, one leaves for plot reasons that will be important in either DLC or ME3, and the other leaves for possibly the same reason.

As I mentioned before, its far cheaper for Bioware to bring back half the ME2 team, and use them again, then it is to drop them all for a whole crew of new companions, hiring all the ME2s voiceactors, then having to hire a whole new team of voiceactors tends to cost a bit more then just hiring all the old teams voiceactors, especially when most of them are not really bigbudget names.