367 réponses à ce sujet

[xKerberos]

R34P3RR3D33M3R wrote...

xKerberos wrote...

Default137 wrote...
Ashley/Kaiden is on Horizon, and is then sent on a "secret mission"

I thought the secret mission was Horizon? Unfortunately Anderson doesn't change that dialogue after you do Horizon.

He does, you can tell him that you met Kaidan/Ashley on Horizon, and he'll apologize that he couldn't tell you because they don't trust Cerberus, or something.

Really? Oh bah, I have to go replay that part but I'm too lazy to dodge the Praetorian over and over.

[The Capital Gaultier]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

As apparently one of the 5/6s that don't see reason, or lets pull some other random number of the air, 7/9s, you would not need to recruit them.  They will already be in your team, cutting the need for all the talk during the recruitment mission, and no loyalty mission, just standard NPC chatter.  That was kind of the point of ME2: to get the recruitment out of the way for the ultimate end adventure in ME3. 

Hell, your proposed method would actually cost more, since you not only need to voice all the new recruits but the old ones, set up missions for these cameos, code in all the new squaddies AND your standard squaddies (since you now need to voice for both eventualities of those who do have the character for those missions and those who lost them). 

If you feel that people who like their game to have the option of letting them get their characters through as opposed to forcing some artificial Virmir moment (I mean, come on, that moment in ME1 so not dramatic, it was contrived "Ooh you can only save one!  Now you get to spend ten minutes talking to bad guy despite the time limit you're on ooo!") because some character called it a suicide mission, then you need to stop serving at Burger King since the chemicals in the food seem to be getting to your head.

The reason he's talking about depends upon the inference that ME3 will be of similar structure to ME2.  You are absolutely right that they may lessen the squad focus in ME3 and stick more to telling the main story, but the structure may also go more towards the direction of squad interaction featured prominently in ME2 and partially in ME1.

[Pauravi]

The Capital Gaultier wrote...

Here's the problem: whoever they let in your squad will need a lot of voice acting. Because of this, it's more likely that we'll see most of the ME1 squad. Wrex, Ashley and Kaidan could die so they'll probably make cameos. Since all of your ME2 crew except Joker and EDI could die, I don't think we'll see anyone from that crew in your squad, either

I don't find this a convincing argument at all.

First of all, why do people believe that paying voice actors to recite half an hour of dialogue is the most costly and difficult part of making this game?  There is already going to be 12 characters in ME2, and a lot of dialogue that was recorded for it wasn't even used.  If it is so costly, why wouldn't they wait until they knew everything in the script and story was finalized?  Keep in mind what I said: There are already 12 characters in ME2.  Yet ME2 also involved doing a whole lot of work on refining and changing the gameplay and graphics engine, which is a huge investment in development time and cost.  But for ME3 that development is already done.  Assuming they devote at least the same amount of resources to the big series finale as to ME2, why wouldn't they have the extra time and money to do some extra voice work?

Also, this sort of logic rests on the idea that some people wouldn't get to see all the recorded dialogue, and so it would be wasted.  But this is only valid reasoning if you believe that people will only play through ONCE.  Certain characters might not see all the dialogue, but I believe that almost everyone who played the game would eventually experience all the content by virtue of multiple playthroughs.  Nothing is actually being "wasted".  If anything, it increases replay value for ALL the games.

Finally, there are story reasons.  You just spent a whole game developing deep characters in ME2 who are loyal to your character.  They built this game on the idea that your decisions in ME2 matter in ME3.  Having a whole new cast would completely wreck that idea.  It would destroy peoples emotional connection to the game, after having fostered friendships and romances in ME2 and even way back to ME1.  The ends of trilogies are also times for wrapping up character stories and loose ends, not creating more of them by adding a lot of new characters.  There are many more reasons story-wise why this doesn't make any sense.

Essentially, the idea that they're going to get rid of everyone and/or relegate them to cameos is preposterous.

[FlintlockJazz]

The Capital Gaultier wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...

As apparently one of the 5/6s that don't see reason, or lets pull some other random number of the air, 7/9s, you would not need to recruit them.  They will already be in your team, cutting the need for all the talk during the recruitment mission, and no loyalty mission, just standard NPC chatter.  That was kind of the point of ME2: to get the recruitment out of the way for the ultimate end adventure in ME3. 

Hell, your proposed method would actually cost more, since you not only need to voice all the new recruits but the old ones, set up missions for these cameos, code in all the new squaddies AND your standard squaddies (since you now need to voice for both eventualities of those who do have the character for those missions and those who lost them). 

If you feel that people who like their game to have the option of letting them get their characters through as opposed to forcing some artificial Virmir moment (I mean, come on, that moment in ME1 so not dramatic, it was contrived "Ooh you can only save one!  Now you get to spend ten minutes talking to bad guy despite the time limit you're on ooo!") because some character called it a suicide mission, then you need to stop serving at Burger King since the chemicals in the food seem to be getting to your head.

The reason he's talking about depends upon the inference that ME3 will be of similar structure to ME2.  You are absolutely right that they may lessen the squad focus in ME3 and stick more to telling the main story, but the structure may also go more towards the direction of squad interaction featured prominently in ME2 and partially in ME1.

True, I'm not saying they won't turn everyone into a cameo and stick us with some new squad, I was just pointing out why some do still hold out hope that they won't.   That and I'm in a bit of a bad mood and didn't like how he infered certain things about some people may have caused me to react badly. :innocent:

[The Capital Gaultier]

Pauravi wrote...

The Capital Gaultier wrote...

Here's the problem: whoever they let in your squad will need a lot of voice acting. Because of this, it's more likely that we'll see most of the ME1 squad. Wrex, Ashley and Kaidan could die so they'll probably make cameos. Since all of your ME2 crew except Joker and EDI could die, I don't think we'll see anyone from that crew in your squad, either

I don't find this a convincing argument at all.

First of all, why do people believe that paying voice actors to recite half an hour of dialogue is the most costly and difficult part of making this game?  There is already going to be 12 characters in ME2, and a lot of dialogue that was recorded for it wasn't even used.  If it is so costly, why wouldn't they wait until they knew everything in the script and story was finalized?  Keep in mind what I said: There are already 12 characters in ME2.  Yet ME2 also involved doing a whole lot of work on refining and changing the gameplay and graphics engine, which is a huge investment in development time and cost.  But for ME3 that development is already done.  Assuming they devote at least the same amount of resources to the big series finale as to ME2, why wouldn't they have the extra time and money to do some extra voice work?

Also, this sort of logic rests on the idea that some people wouldn't get to see all the recorded dialogue, and so it would be wasted.  But this is only valid reasoning if you believe that people will only play through ONCE.  Certain characters might not see all the dialogue, but I believe that almost everyone who played the game would eventually experience all the content by virtue of multiple playthroughs.  Nothing is actually being "wasted".  If anything, it increases replay value for ALL the games.

Finally, there are story reasons.  You just spent a whole game developing deep characters in ME2 who are loyal to your character.  They built this game on the idea that your decisions in ME2 matter in ME3.  Having a whole new cast would completely wreck that idea.  It would destroy peoples emotional connection to the game, after having fostered friendships and romances in ME2 and even way back to ME1.  The ends of trilogies are also times for wrapping up character stories and loose ends, not creating more of them by adding a lot of new characters.  There are many more reasons story-wise why this doesn't make any sense.

Essentially, the idea that they're going to get rid of everyone and/or relegate them to cameos is preposterous.

Because every single voice actor's line needs to be scripted, edited, acted and localized.  Voice acting adds a lot of extra costs when you consider what has to be done in addition to just making the characters talk in the English version of the game.

[Massadonious1]

Given the sucess of both games (especially this one) I'm pretty sure BioWare/EA will be a little less tight with their purse strings if they know the end product will make them a boatload of money in the end.

[Zulu_DFA]

Epantiras wrote...

Still, I wonder... why putting so much effort to create awesome squadmembers in Me2 if they won't have big roles in me3? But I see the point of those who remind us that the whole me2 team could die in the suicide mission.

First, ME is the Story of Commander Shepard fighting the Reapers in the Galaxy of the Morons (see Turian Councilor). That means that all the squadmates, however awesome they may seem to some people, are secondary. it's the simplest answer.

In ME2 the focus was on the characters and their backstories with quite a short main plot because the Devs probably thought that piling up plot-important decisions or elaboration on the consequences of those from the first game will require ME3 to develop for 10 years into a 200 Gb monster of a game just to include all possible ending. It is bad enoough as it is:

Rachni Queen choice (2 outcomes pending)
Wrex/genophage choice - Krogans' fate (4)
Terra Firma party choice (2)
Council's fate (3)
Collector station choice (2)
Geth Heretics' fate (2)
Migrant fleet mission outcome (4)

That makes it close to 800 combinations. Which means that those outcomes won't be all interdependent. Possibly only the biggest of those will have unique value and others only adding to the "score" of darkness/lightness of the post-Reaper Galaxy. To make this work nearly enough to "9/10" they'll have to commit as much budget as possible, which leaves a very thin budget for expendable characters' dialogue.

I think we'll get Liara, Ashley/Kaidan, Legion and around 5 new mercenary type characters with little to zero "daddy issues."

[FlintlockJazz]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I think we'll get Liara, Ashley/Kaidan, Legion and around 5 new mercenary type characters with little to zero "daddy issues."

Why Legion may I ask?

[Zulu_DFA]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

As apparently one of the 5/6s that don't see reason, or lets pull some other random number of the air, 7/9s,

1/6 is not random. Capital Gaultier was the 6th person to post in this thread and the 1st reasonable.

FlintlockJazz wrote...
you would not need to recruit them.  They will already be in your team, cutting the need for all the talk during the recruitment mission, and no loyalty mission, just standard NPC chatter.  That was kind of the point of ME2: to get the recruitment out of the way for the ultimate end adventure in ME3. 

Have you played ME1? If not, do it. If yes, you should know that to be recruited a character does not require a separate mission and any extra dialogue. Also this "loyalty mission" crap was just to fill in content between the really important story parts, that is ME1 and ME3, and also to bring in a simlpe modifier to the suicide mission deaths.

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Hell, your proposed method would actually cost more, since you not only need to voice all the new recruits but the old ones, set up missions for these cameos, code in all the new squaddies AND your standard squaddies (since you now need to voice for both eventualities of those who do have the character for those missions and those who lost them). 

My method would cost more than yours, only if you don't plan to have any NPC dialogue. In my method the "temporaries" act both as NPCs and squadmates during only one short section of the game each.

FlintlockJazz wrote...
If you feel that people who like their game to have the option of letting them get their characters through as opposed to forcing some artificial Virmir moment (I mean, come on, that moment in ME1 so not dramatic, it was contrived "Ooh you can only save one!  Now you get to spend ten minutes talking to bad guy despite the time limit you're on ooo!") because some character called it a suicide mission, then you deserve the Burger King ending.

I agree, listening to Saren's rant while Kaidan was frying at the AA tower was not the best idea. But "get every your awesome badass fashion show contestant on the friggin shuttle, because Collectors need to abduct the whole crew and EDI's going to flush the ship" was a far worse idea. We have to leave with both. As to the idea of bringing everyone of a squad of ten alive from a mission to an unreconed location with hostiles crawling all over, it trumps them both. Initially I though the suicide mission is going to have several "virmire choices", but as soon as I saw "noone left behind acheivement", I knew ME2 is a setback from ME1 and caters to kids underage of the official ERSB rating.

[mundus66]

Although i'm am pretty sure every crew member that survived will play a part in some way, i do not think more than the romance able and maybe 1 or 2 more will return as recruits.

We will still have Ashley/Kaiden, Liara + some members from this. But i honestly don't think Mordin, Morinth, Zaeed or Thane (unless the hanar cures the kepler's syndrome) will make a return as crew.

Every romance (other than Thane if he dies) better return though.

[Default137]

The Capital Gaultier wrote...

Default137 wrote...

And why wouldn't Bioware do voice acting for nine people? They have to hire the actors anyway for their cameos, and Voice Acting is not by hour, its by project, if they hire them, its cost efficient for keep them for an entire game ( project ), and would actually be wasting money to just hire them for one or two lines. Sorry, but bringing them in for just a cameo actually makes less sense then you think it does.

Because there's a serious difference in quantity of voice acting between nine people and two people.  Even if they got a contract where time worked did not affect the pay (yeah, right...), they'd still have issues with localization to contend with.

Face it, there'll be zero members from the ME2 squad as ME3 squad members (most likely).

Here is the problem.

No matter what happens, most of the squad will be cameo, I could see Zaeed not making it, but every other person on the squad will be making an appearence in one way or another, even minor, I'm sure we can agree on this right? As every character in ME1 came back in some way or another even minor characters.

Well, voice actors are not paid by hour, they are paid by project, although this can change depending on who we are talking about, thus, no matter if its a five minute line, or a whole games worth of lines, they will still get paid lets say a hypothetical $1200 for a specific project.

Now, if your going to bring in someone for one line in a cameo, and it costs $1200 for their talents, you are going to use them more then that, story be damned, because you just spent $1200 on them, this is why many of the voice actors who came back to do cameos for characters like Helena Blake also did many other voices to, it allowed them to kill two birds with one stone.

So if they are already going to pay the salary of all the crew members from ME2, why would they stop there? You assume it would cost a bunch more money, but chances are, it wouldn't cost much at all due to them already being signed on the project, and would actually be a good longterm investment.

There is no real evidence, or any real logical reason why most of the ME2 crew would not make it, from ME1 to ME2, 50% of our crew stayed with us, while 50% left to become plot characters, if that stays true for ME3, that means close to 6 people on our current crew will still be crewmembers, and I could easily see many turning in to basic NPCs rather then staying with the squad, Mordin for example could easily just become a ship NPC, and still retain his charm.

And adding new characters would be a much greater hassle then just bringing in new ones, you'd have to hire totally new voice actors, while the current ones actually cover more then just their squad member, Thane does several other voices for example, then you'd have to give them a story, and then build their character while you are also saving the galaxy, which would just overcrowd the game to the point of silliness.

It would be much easier for Bioware to just put in all the old crew members minus a few ( Jack, Mordin, Thane, Samara, Zaeed ), and add the old ME1 crewmembers in, and call it a day, that would be the cheapest, and the easiest method of handling everything from both a business and development standpoint.

Modifié par Default137, 24 février 2010 - 10:54 .

[Zulu_DFA]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I think we'll get Liara, Ashley/Kaidan, Legion and around 5 new mercenary type characters with little to zero "daddy issues."

Why Legion may I ask?

1. Because they are all geth.

2. On the suicide mission only hardware can get destroyed. Organics write their wills prior to embarking on suicde missions. Geth make back-up copies of themselves.

[BellaStrega]

This is ridiculous. The point of Mass Effect 2 was to provide a strong cast to carry you through the final part. The idea that they spent approximately 75% of ME2 on a throwaway squad you will barely see in ME3 does not even make sense.

The reasons they effectively hit the reboot button in ME1 were to give us a better squad, a better ship, and another conflict. They're not going to hit the reboot button a second time.

You probably won't see all of the squad members in ME2, but I believe a Bioware dev said something about datamining who the most popular squadmembers are.

Also, since it's so easy to finish the game with all survivors, I don't think arguing around the basis of the possibility of getting to the end with two squad members should define how development goes. The majority of players will have a fairly large number of survivors.

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

[Daerog]

Edit: Bah, I'm just repeating other posts too much I realize. So, short: All characters from ME1 and ME2 transferring is 14, minimum is 4, could leave some out. Not that hard for me to see, but I don't know why they'd add more people when there are so many main and supporting characters already.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 24 février 2010 - 11:05 .

[FlintlockJazz]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...

As apparently one of the 5/6s that don't see reason, or lets pull some other random number of the air, 7/9s,

1/6 is not random. Capital Gaultier was the 6th person to post in this thread and the 1st reasonable.

The other posts seemed quite reasonable to me, was it more a case of you don't agree with them and you are too unreasonable to realise that people can have differing opiniong?  That sounds more plausible to me...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
you would not need to recruit them.  They will already be in your team, cutting the need for all the talk during the recruitment mission, and no loyalty mission, just standard NPC chatter.  That was kind of the point of ME2: to get the recruitment out of the way for the ultimate end adventure in ME3. 

Have you played ME1? If not, do it. If yes, you should know that to be recruited a character does not require a separate mission and any extra dialogue. Also this "loyalty mission" crap was just to fill in content between the really important story parts, that is ME1 and ME3, and also to bring in a simlpe modifier to the suicide mission deaths.

Yes I have played ME1, love it when people like you try and deflect a point like that, especially since my mentioning of Virmire later proves that I have played ME1 and that your question is unnecessary.  The recruitment and loyalty missions contain a large portion of the dialogue for each squadmate, this means without having to recruit them or do their loyalty missions you remove a vast chunk of the required dialogue from the character, the rest is mostly optional, especially during missions where you can only have two squadmates with you anyway, and yet they recorded every possible NPC comment possible...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
Hell, your proposed method would actually cost more, since you not only need to voice all the new recruits but the old ones, set up missions for these cameos, code in all the new squaddies AND your standard squaddies (since you now need to voice for both eventualities of those who do have the character for those missions and those who lost them). 

My method would cost more than yours, only if you don't plan to have any NPC dialogue. In my method the "temporaries" act both as NPCs and squadmates during only one short section of the game each.

Right, so you have to record both the temporaries and a replacement dialogue for those who let that character die in ME2 since they would need another NPC to come along and say the required lines.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...
If you feel that people who like their game to have the option of letting them get their characters through as opposed to forcing some artificial Virmir moment (I mean, come on, that moment in ME1 so not dramatic, it was contrived "Ooh you can only save one!  Now you get to spend ten minutes talking to bad guy despite the time limit you're on ooo!") because some character called it a suicide mission, then you deserve the Burger King ending.

I agree, listening to Saren's rant while Kaidan was frying at the AA tower was not the best idea. But "get every your awesome badass fashion show contestant on the friggin shuttle, because Collectors need to abduct the whole crew and EDI's going to flush the ship" was a far worse idea. We have to leave with both. As to the idea of bringing everyone of a squad of ten alive from a mission to an unreconed location with hostiles crawling all over, it trumps them both. Initially I though the suicide mission is going to have several "virmire choices", but as soon as I saw "noone left behind acheivement", I knew ME2 is a setback from ME1 and caters to kids underage of the official ERSB rating.

The Virmire choice was contrived.  If someone dies, I want it to be because of the choices I made, not because the plot is written to force what for me is a terribly cliched moment.  Death does not equate to maturity, and regardless that is all your opinion just as it's my opinion that Virmire didn't really bring much to the game.  Plus, repeating it again in the sequel would be repetitive and make the choice in the first even more meaningless.  The loss of one man can be used to continually remind you of that choice you had to make, the loss of half a dozen just makes the individual deaths less meaningful. 

And as to it being called a suicide mission and still making it through, that's kind of the point:  Shepard is able to go through hell and survive, do what others call the impossible and pull it off, etc.  It's drama.  Regardless, this last point is irrelevant to the discussion since it's all about opinion on the ending and not about the topic which is about whether or not we think they'll bring over the squadmates from to 2 into 3.

[FlintlockJazz]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

I think we'll get Liara, Ashley/Kaidan, Legion and around 5 new mercenary type characters with little to zero "daddy issues."

Why Legion may I ask?

1. Because they are all geth.

2. On the suicide mission only hardware can get destroyed. Organics write their wills prior to embarking on suicde missions. Geth make back-up copies of themselves.

I don't get the relevance of the first point, who are you refering to when you say they?  As to the second, I think Bioware intended Legion's death, if it occurs, to be final regardless of the actual technicalities that would prevent that (I like how they took a more realistic approach to artificial life still, not even BSG did it properly like this).  Plus, even if he can back himself up there is the problem that people may have given him over to Cerberus instead of waking him up, which would be the same as not recruiting him.  Personally, I can't see him being any more recruitable than the others in 3, but that's just me.

[Massadonious1]

I'd also like to add that if certain characters are going to be relegated to non-descript, cameo roles, then why bother adding the possibility of keeping them alive through the suicide mission in the first place? We all know that the job of doing what needs to be done in ME3 is going to happen no matter what, from a metagaming standpoint.



Take Grunt for example. Let's just say he becomes some NPC general for the Krogan forces. What would be the difference between him and some random placeholder? A few extra lines of diaologue? This wouldn't be like Wrex, either. He's going to end up with 3 games of character and plot development. But, after this game, Grunt's time in the ME universe is probably up. I enjoy those little bits of nostalgia as much as the next guy, but not giving him a major role under those circumstances would seem pointless.



Keep in mind that I only used Grunt as an example. I don't have any particular opinion on wether he should even return as a squadmate or not, or that his current role in the universe is even that important. But, you can make the same case for all but a couple of the current squadmates.

[Zulu_DFA]

BellaStrega wrote...

This is ridiculous. The point of Mass Effect 2 was to provide a strong cast to carry you through the final part. The idea that they spent approximately 75% of ME2 on a throwaway squad you will barely see in ME3 does not even make sense.

The reasons they effectively hit the reboot button in ME1 were to give us a better squad, a better ship, and another conflict. They're not going to hit the reboot button a second time.

You probably won't see all of the squad members in ME2, but I believe a Bioware dev said something about datamining who the most popular squadmembers are.

Also, since it's so easy to finish the game with all survivors, I don't think arguing around the basis of the possibility of getting to the end with two squad members should define how development goes. The majority of players will have a fairly large number of survivors.

Thane & Mordin for example were useless even in terms of the very simplistic and artificial "suicide mission" mechanics. Not the strongest squadmate in "conventional" combat too. Mordin however was the most importamt charachter storywise. Thane was not. Thane is going to die from natural causes within a year. Even as a love interest for alien sex perverts he loses to Garrus in every way. So what was the reason of bringing him into the game? Poster character?

And a BioWare devs also said something about benching those characters who must make it to the final game. No ME2 squadmate was planned as be critical to ME3 plot, and they already have planned out the mainframe of ME3 plot prior to the release of ME2. Why would they change thier mind now?

[SurfaceBeneath]

I think your logic is sound OP, but I would not make premature assumptions about who is getting in to ME3 and who is not. I do think that likely a high number of NPCs from ME1 and 2 will be back, but I wouldn't get your hopes up on all of them returning, as that is a ridiculously huge cast assuming that even more weren't added (and I think we will probably see a few new guys next game too)

[Gill Kaiser]

I admit that I worry about whether Bioware will be able to afford or be willing to implement all the squadmates and all the various possible consequences of choices in ME1 and ME2. However, I trust them, and they've not let me down so far.

Also, I got the feeling while playing ME2 that Bioware already came up with the overall plot for ME3 and were foreshadowing various parts of it. Therefore I expect they had the future of the ME2 squadmates planned all along.

[Computron2000]

I'm thinking any new fellas in ME3 will actually be Zaeed and Kasumi. Since they are DLC in ME2 and thus optional, they could be made official in ME3.



I also noticed that no matter what you do, you will survive with *2* team members since the everybody is dead ending cannot be imported into ME3. 2+Liara= Good to go.

[BellaStrega]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Thane & Mordin for example were useless even in terms of the very simplistic and artificial "suicide mission" mechanics. Not the strongest squadmate in "conventional" combat too. Mordin however was the most importamt charachter storywise. Thane was not. Thane is going to die from natural causes within a year. Even as a love interest for alien sex perverts he loses to Garrus in every way. So what was the reason of bringing him into the game? Poster character?

And a BioWare devs also said something about benching those characters who must make it to the final game. No ME2 squadmate was planned as be critical to ME3 plot, and they already have planned out the mainframe of ME3 plot prior to the release of ME2. Why would they change thier mind now?

Of course they're not critical to the plot. Any of them could be dead in ME3. I wasn't arguing that they were critical to the plot. I  also mentioned that a dev said something about datamining which characters are getting the most use to decide who will get to be in the third game.

What's ridiculous is everyone assuming that ME3 is going to be another recruitfest when you already have more than enough squadmates and former squadmates from which to draw a cast for the third game, and it would break the plot's momentum if you were sent back to zero yet a third time. There probably will be some recruiting, but the people who are like "No squadmates from 2 will return in 3" are talking out their fundament.

[BellaStrega]

Computron2000 wrote...

I'm thinking any new fellas in ME3 will actually be Zaeed and Kasumi. Since they are DLC in ME2 and thus optional, they could be made official in ME3.

I also noticed that no matter what you do, you will survive with *2* team members since the everybody is dead ending cannot be imported into ME3. 2+Liara= Good to go.

That could be 2+  Liara +  Ashley or Kaiden.

[sergio71785]

I'm positive every potential LI will be a squad member in ME3.

Morinth/Samara will not be back as squad members. Liara (who is incapable of having died thus far) will take the role of the biotic asari crew member. Also, the fact that Morinth/Samara are interchangeable, also leads me to believe they never intended to develop either one very far for ME3. 

Modifié par sergio71785, 24 février 2010 - 11:31 .

[Computron2000]

BellaStrega wrote...
That could be 2+  Liara +  Ashley or Kaiden.

Ugh, don't remind me of Ashley and Kaidan. Only managed to nuke 1 of those 2 in ME1