206 réponses à ce sujet

[Geralt of Relays]

I’d love it to be the case there will be many & varied consequences (and combinations of them) from ME1 & ME2 for going into ME3. Though going by how choices from ME1 into ME2 went, I fear most of our choices will get reduced to a line of dialogue, or worse down to “a new message in your private terminal”.
 
Even though it was said at the beginning this was going to be a 3 game adventure, ME1 or ME2 could have bombed meaning there would be no ME3 to get to. ME2 especially has been a real hit so it means there’s a green light for the final part, what I hope happens now is BW take the training wheels off and just go all out and bring back some of the epic feel of ME1 and marry it with the good parts of ME2 along with the kind of character & cross-character interactions we’ve seen in Dragon Age.
 
I can accept it easily enough this trilogy will be more about the journey, not the destination on the rise & fall of the reapers and it’s quite a tightrope to walk. The choices you can make in both games are the greatest strength & biggest liability of all. It would take longer to make or consume more resources to have choices play through in a more meaningful way beyond some e-mail you get in-game. (I’d gladly stump up more cash though if the adventure was going to be bigger.)
 
For example, my idea of choices playing out into ME2 & beyond wouldn’t get beyond the pipedream stage in the commercial game industry world. My vision of ME2 would have been like 2 games in 1. If you had a renegade ending in ME1 & swept away the council, then Cerberus would be the ones to bring you back and you’d work for them, acquiring/using any means or any technology that would help you outgun the reapers, including hitting the collectors. 
 
Have a paragon ending and saved the council then STG for example could have brought you back and your task would be to hit the collector’s base and bring back solid proof for the council about the threat while along the way trying to plant the seeds of uniting all the races in the galaxy to stand up as one for the impending reaper invasion. Very brief but I hope you get the idea of where I’m going.
 
I won’t hold my breath on ME3, and maybe by keeping my expectations low this time around it will blow me away.
 
Please BW, make the choices taken have more of an impact this time around! The OP has the right idea, hope to see something along those lines in ME3.

[Zulu_DFA]

DJO Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote...

I’d love it to be the case there will be many & varied consequences (and combinations of them) from ME1 & ME2 for going into ME3. Though going by how choices from ME1 into ME2 went, I fear most of our choices will get reduced to a line of dialogue, or worse down to “a new message in your private terminal”.
 
Even though it was said at the beginning this was going to be a 3 game adventure, ME1 or ME2 could have bombed meaning there would be no ME3 to get to. ME2 especially has been a real hit so it means there’s a green light for the final part, what I hope happens now is BW take the training wheels off and just go all out and bring back some of the epic feel of ME1 and marry it with the good parts of ME2 along with the kind of character & cross-character interactions we’ve seen in Dragon Age.
 
I can accept it easily enough this trilogy will be more about the journey, not the destination on the rise & fall of the reapers and it’s quite a tightrope to walk. The choices you can make in both games are the greatest strength & biggest liability of all. It would take longer to make or consume more resources to have choices play through in a more meaningful way beyond some e-mail you get in-game. (I’d gladly stump up more cash though if the adventure was going to be bigger.)
 
For example, my idea of choices playing out into ME2 & beyond wouldn’t get beyond the pipedream stage in the commercial game industry world. My vision of ME2 would have been like 2 games in 1. If you had a renegade ending in ME1 & swept away the council, then Cerberus would be the ones to bring you back and you’d work for them, acquiring/using any means or any technology that would help you outgun the reapers, including hitting the collectors. 
 
Have a paragon ending and saved the council then STG for example could have brought you back and your task would be to hit the collector’s base and bring back solid proof for the council about the threat while along the way trying to plant the seeds of uniting all the races in the galaxy to stand up as one for the impending reaper invasion. Very brief but I hope you get the idea of where I’m going.
 
I won’t hold my breath on ME3, and maybe by keeping my expectations low this time around it will blow me away.
 
Please BW, make the choices taken have more of an impact this time around! The OP has the right idea, hope to see something along those lines in ME3.

Whilst you speak the truth I hear, Obi-Wan! /Yoda-mode.

The worst thing they could do to ME3 and therefore to the whole trilogy is to push it early on the market. It feels this way already with ME2. Let's just hope they'll come up with something lavish for them bucks-wise, and will be able to withhold ME3 release until it is absolutely ready.

Personally, I wouldn't mind waiting 3 or 4 years for ME3. Even though I won't experience much more than 50% of its content with *my* Shepard, that exists only in 1 incarnation and quite a renegade one at that.

In the meantime whey could hold the fans at bay with DLC and a couple of full-scale Expansion Packs for ME2. There are some questions that need to be answered but not necessarily in ME3. Like, who the hell is the Shadow Broker? What's happening to that star Tali was studying? A 6-hour job for $15-20 will have a good budget/revenue ratio for the EA honchos, ****** off some "where's my content" greedy kids, and cater to the ME2-squaddie fanboys.

But ME3 ought to be a mind-blowing experience it terms of intense action, thrilling story and arse-biting consequences.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 02 mars 2010 - 03:06 .

[Multifarious Algorithm]

There is of course the issue that in many respects, there's a line to be walked in terms of how big a consequence Shepard's actions should have on the rest of the galaxy. He's one man in an influential position, but he's just one man.



It would not bother me in the slightest if some seeming big decisions from the earlier games turned out to be a lot less important then I thought they were, provided it was presented in a reasonable manner as to why that would be. Events have momentum - you might be able to adjust the path they take a little, but they're headed towards the same destination.

[Zulu_DFA]

Multifarious Algorithm wrote...

Events have momentum....

Ah... "momentum"... We have dismissed its importance.

[Sorry, couldn't resist.]

[Reiella]

wraith1113 wrote...

So what you're saying is the possibility of failure not just in the game play aspect, but the story itself, makes the experience richer? If so, I agree but I seriously doubt that a trilogy that is already in progress will say for the last iteration that "Hey, based on the decisions you made in the last two games your character could be boned! If you're starting a new character in this game it will be a little more challenging and/or will end up less successful as well!" That sort of thing would have to be announced while explaining the premise of the trilogy early on before the first release. While I'd be interested to see a game like that, I don't think Mass Effect 3 will be it.

Agreed, even the heavily serialized games like .Hack didn't really go that far.  To be much desire to be able to grow the audience instead of just maintain it.

[Dhraconus]

Count me among the people wanting ME3 to be possible to lose IF you played ME1 and ME2 (maybe just ME2) and made ****** poor choices. An example would be the following:

Kill Rachni
Kill Wrex + destroy genophage cure
Kill Council + every other anti-alien thing you can do
Destroy Geth base + encourage Quarian/Geth war + ****** off Quarians/Tali every way you can
****** off Cerberus (don't trust them, destroy base, etc...)
Be as rude to the Alliance as possible
Edit: Can't forget killing every squad member possible, failing Liara's missions, and pissing of Ash/Kaidan

I'm sure you get the theme by now. Basically burning every bridge you can, kill/weaken the galaxy as much as possible, generally insuring you have ZERO allies. I really think if you do this you SHOULD FAIL.... epicly would be best. Otherwise victory should be possible, though possibly only with great sacrifices.

Modifié par Dhraconus, 02 mars 2010 - 03:39 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Dhraconus wrote...

Count me among the people wanting ME3 to be possible to lose IF you played ME1 and ME2 (maybe just ME2) and made ****** poor choices. An example would be the following:

Kill Rachni
Kill Wrex + destroy genophage cure
Kill Council + every other anti-alien thing you can do
Destroy Geth base + encourage Quarian/Geth war + ****** off Quarians/Tali every way you can
****** off Cerberus (don't trust them, destroy base, etc...)
Be as rude to the Alliance as possible
Edit: Can't forget killing every squad member possible, failing Liara's missions, and pissing of Ash/Kaidan

I'm sure you get the theme by now. Basically burning every bridge you can, kill/weaken the galaxy as much as possible, generally insuring you have ZERO allies. I really think if you do this you SHOULD FAIL.... epicly would be best. Otherwise victory should be possible, though possibly only with great sacrifices.

Bad, bad Shepard. You must be a lonely one too. Not a single "Thank you!" e-mail... that must be horrible. And gamebreakin.

[cipher_Cero]

Just read this... and I'm not reading through six pages of posts. However, from just reading OP I'd say I definitely agree with that. That was the impression I was given with the initial Mass Effect trailer, but that wasn't the game I played. I either did or didn't do a quest, and won the game regardless, and maybe I'd see a brief mention of it in the sequel. I am disappoint.



Doubtful they'll implement that, but with ME3 being the end, BioWare has stated that they can let all your choices branch out as much as they possibly can. Hopefully we see those big consequences.

[Chuvvy]

I'd like to see this,I don't give the base to TIM even though that is a bad decision,because I know I can still win without the Tech no matter what. I'd like to see you haveing a much better chance and less damage to the galaxy if you gave the base to TIM.TIM would go insane with power but I'd cross that bridge when I came to it.

Modifié par Slidell505, 12 mars 2010 - 05:12 .

[ControlFreak12]

I'm reviving this thread just because I think this is a great idea and I hope Bioware decides to implement it to some degree. I always felt that the choices you made in ME1 and ME2 were cosmetic at best. Bioware was on the right track when they allowed individual characters to permadie based on the decisions you made leading up to and during the suicide mission. They could go so much further in ME3! The first order of business, I think, would be to have the death of characters in ME2 tangibly affect the dialogue in a way that was not just Shepard going "We lost _____, _____, and _____. They will be missed." I would like to see more ideas about where they can go with this, but I don't want to let this thread die. It's a good one, guys!

[Orange Face_]

Heck yeah, I'm all in with this post... Seriously what is the point of playing a game if losing is not an option? The suicide mission was fun because the whole time I was doing my best not to lose anyone. Keep that competitive nature for the whole galaxy and ME franchise will be a winner!

[Terraneaux]

Mox Ruuga wrote...
Another interesting aspect is that the sum of your decisions – your renegade / paragon status – also has an immediate and profound effect that we can't explain without giving away some of the story.

You know what this sounds like?  Your Paragon or Renegade status would determine whether or not you worked for Cerberus in ME2.  Of course, I'm sure this idea got scrapped for $ reasons.  

[Criz]

Zulu_DFA wrote...
3. Shepard dies, Reapers win. Galaxy eaten.

so, instead of replying with something productive I'd just like to add that I want this on a t-shirt
with a drawing of a smiling chibi-Reaper

[alphax1]

The end game choices for me1 and 2 should have their own main missions in me3 i.e. save council you have to do something wrt a grand alliance... sacrifice you have to strengthen the humans exclusively... destroy base and you have to go to the Geth or something for anti reaper tech... keep base and maybe you fight off a reaper or something...

This would create 2 'extra' missions that you couldn't get in a single play through...

And then the final mission would also incorporate major plot areas like the rachni come in but since you destroyed the Geth Heretics you don't get their help since the Quarians decided to strike... or etc...

Mass Effect 3 should rely heavily on choices made but it also has to be its own game because making me1 and 2 choices count for too much and you have frustrations that way... I don't want every single stupid paragade decision possibly coming back and biting me in the behind... and we all know that Bioware isn't going to be able to make the 'best game in the universe!' that covers every contingency.

IMO the path to victory or death in ME3 should not be harder based on the choices made in ME1 or ME2 but simply different. If you are pure renegade humanist but you 'win' all the ME3 missions it shouldn't be any harder to be alive at the end... but don't expect the galaxy to be a multi species utopia... and on the opposite end even if you were the super alliance builder multicultural paragon but you make some really 'bad' decisions your paragon ness in the previous games doesn't in any way compensate for that

Modifié par alphax1, 12 mars 2010 - 08:40 .

[Alamar2078]

I basically agree with the OP. A brand new ME3 character should be able to get to reasonably see many of the endings [including the more smurfy ones as well as the "galaxy in ashes" ending] ....



I'd really like to see options in the ME3 "new character" builder [advanced option] where you can at least choose "Gee I was a huge douche" [renegade] or "Gee I was a boy scout" [paragon] or "I was middle of the road" [renegon?] ... Who were the love interests if any? ... then go from there. This should let you see a lot of the content without HAVING to replay ME1 & ME2 for just the right combo.

[Axterix]

The reason why choices have little impact is pretty obvious.

You've got X dev time. The more choices you have to account for, the more that dev time gets spread out. And that means a shorter game, as time is spent on breadth rather than depth. Because of that, the majority of gameplay will be relatively the same, regardless of choices and that is why ME 1 choices have little impact on ME 2. And why the choices in either won't make much difference for the start of ME 3.

Consider the party you pick up. Would you rather have all the ones, including the 2 DLC or just the 6 like you best with 2x the content for each? Now, who we would pick would vary, no doubt. But I think most of us can think of 2 or 3 party members we would gladly do without so as to have more content with the 2 or 3 we like best.

I do expect that, with ME 3 being the last part, the choices you've made will make some differences at the end. Some allies you could have had show up at the final battle. Some things that change the post script. But for most of the game, they won't matter much. If you didn't save your crew, for example, I expect you'll get the doctor from ME 1's medical ward instead. And there will be limited dialogue.

One thing I do hope they do is improve the new character design scheme for ME 3...if starting a non-imported character, you really should be asked at character creation about what choices you made for the bigger ones. Did you kill Wrex? Save the council? Give out the info on Tali's father? And so on. That way, people who haven't played ME 1 and 2 can get a lot more replay value out of it. Something they really should have done for ME 2 as well. Not for every choice, but for the big ones.

If they do something like that, then they can make the choices matter a bit more. A game play through would be shorter, but playing a second time would result in the possibility of less repeated content. So even there, it wouldn't change too much.

Modifié par Axterix, 12 mars 2010 - 09:36 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Criz-Zone wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...
3. Shepard dies, Reapers win. Galaxy eaten.

so, instead of replying with something productive I'd just like to add that I want this on a t-shirt
with a drawing of a smiling chibi-Reaper

Thinking in another direction, they could use the possibility of such an outcome in the game for their marketing campain. Something along Independence Day / Doomsday / Judgement Day lines and the customer's opportunity to personally avert it.

[Zulu_DFA]

Terraneaux wrote...

Mox Ruuga wrote...
Another interesting aspect is that the sum of your decisions – your renegade / paragon status – also has an immediate and profound effect that we can't explain without giving away some of the story.

You know what this sounds like?  Your Paragon or Renegade status would determine whether or not you worked for Cerberus in ME2.  Of course, I'm sure this idea got scrapped for $ reasons.  

This sounds like the scars system, and the in-game reason for it: Shepard's death and resurrection by Cerberus with the use of "cybernetic fusion".

Which is cosmetic effect, not a "real consequence".

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 13 mars 2010 - 12:07 .

[Ecael]

Hey Zulu_DFA, I haven't commented on this thread yet (mainly because I can't really respond to all the replies at this point), but I do agree with your idea. It would make all those choices actually matter.

wraith1113 wrote...

So what you're saying is the possibility of failure not just in the game play aspect, but the story itself, makes the experience richer? If so, I agree but I seriously doubt that a trilogy that is already in progress will say for the last iteration that "Hey, based on the decisions you made in the last two games your character could be boned! If you're starting a new character in this game it will be a little more challenging and/or will end up less successful as well!" That sort of thing would have to be announced while explaining the premise of the trilogy early on before the first release. While I'd be interested to see a game like that, I don't think Mass Effect 3 will be it.

No one said that a movie, book or game series absolutely has to have one good ending, nor does that good ending have to be the canon. BioWare could very well set up a situation where 99% of players will see all the bad endings, and the 1% of players who made all the right Paragon/Renegade choices see the exclusive good ending.

The Reapers aren't exactly an easy foe, after all.

[Zulu_DFA]

Ecael wrote...

Hey Zulu_DFA, I haven't commented on this thread yet (mainly because I can't really respond to all the replies at this point), but I do agree with your idea. It would make all those choices actually matter.

wraith1113 wrote...

So what you're saying is the possibility of failure not just in the game play aspect, but the story itself, makes the experience richer? If so, I agree but I seriously doubt that a trilogy that is already in progress will say for the last iteration that "Hey, based on the decisions you made in the last two games your character could be boned! If you're starting a new character in this game it will be a little more challenging and/or will end up less successful as well!" That sort of thing would have to be announced while explaining the premise of the trilogy early on before the first release. While I'd be interested to see a game like that, I don't think Mass Effect 3 will be it.

No one said that a movie, book or game series absolutely has to have one good ending, nor does that good ending have to be the canon. BioWare could very well set up a situation where 99% of players will see all the bad endings, and the 1% of players who made all the right Paragon/Renegade choices see the exclusive good ending.

The Reapers aren't exactly an easy foe, after all.

Wow! Finally!

[claps hands in childish agitation]

Thanx for posting, EDI!

Personally I think, that bad endings are swell. I mean those, when everyone dies or when it looks like a happy end in-movie, but by some reference in the final scene the audience is made aware that it's not going to last long...
Unfortunately, such dramatic effects are unpopular with the audience, that is not generally mature enough to value them high.

And it plays bad jokes even with such acclaimed people as James Cameron. I bet he was aiming higher than 3 secondary Oscars with his Avatar. He earned his big buck in the theaters, but the Academy slapped him in the face. Serves him right. Avatar may be great in special effects, but it sucks in general. Crappy plot = crappy movie. In a couple of years nobody will remember it. He even managed to spoil The Terminator back in 1984: originally the film was about 5 minutes longer and was cut, but along with some stuff merely cool, trashed were the five seconds, that made the ending twice as dark: the "Cyberdyne Systems" sign at the front of the building where the final standoff took place.

I hope BioWare writers will come up with at least one fly in the all-too-blue paragon ointment, and EA censors won't disqualify it just because they aim lower, than their official ERSB rating is going to state.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 14 mars 2010 - 12:22 .

[Maginipowfire]

Just thought this would interest you guys.

kotaku.com/5492759/mass-effect-2-carried-over-700-plot-hooks-from-original-game-saves 

[Mooner911]

Full multi-plot gaming. It's a clever concept that hasn't yet been tried. No doubt market research would need a fat budget initially. But I think the biggest fear factor for any gaming company to develop a multi-plot game is the price tag the consumer sees. The ME example has 3 outcomes. That's 3 games in one plus all the dev syncronization. A big game and a big pricetag. I paid about $60 for my ME2. Would I pay $180 for ME3? Ouch.

[Zulu_DFA]

Mooner911 wrote...

Full multi-plot gaming. It's a clever concept that hasn't yet been tried. No doubt market research would need a fat budget initially. But I think the biggest fear factor for any gaming company to develop a multi-plot game is the price tag the consumer sees. The ME example has 3 outcomes. That's 3 games in one plus all the dev syncronization. A big game and a big pricetag. I paid about $60 for my ME2. Would I pay $180 for ME3? Ouch.

You don't say "no" outright?
Never mind, you won't be required, to pat 3 times as much, because ME3 won't have to be 3 games in 1. It will have to be 1 game with 3 basic endings, plus, say, a couple of variations for the extreme endings, and 5-6 cariations for the avearge ending. That makes in up to 10 endings. So you will be reqired to pay maybe up $99, but isn't it worht it? I bet everyone who played ME1 and ME2 wil buy it no matter what, just to have a closure.

Actually I propose that all the BIG CHOICES kick in sort of simultaneously, with pretty much the same (even linear) game content up to that point, which is easilly assured by some opening plot twist, that will bust all players' Shepards again to an equal start. Some minor choices, like the romantic subplots, get resolved along the way to the Grand Final Battle, where all the big choices kick in and the player gets showered by the consequences of those.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 17 mars 2010 - 10:17 .

[Darkhour]

What is the  Elias Keeler and   Kolyat's target choice?

I punched Keeler in the head a a few times, but I didn't get the impression that it would have some effect on citadel politics. I just assume he is still pro human and the turian is anti human no matter what (assuming they live, if they can die).

[Asari]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlOXAtPvMDk&feature=related

aaaand Elias Keeler and Elias Kelham (Kelhem?) Is not the same person.

Modifié par Asari, 19 mars 2010 - 01:29 .