153 réponses à ce sujet

[XX55XX]

It's clear that people want a bigger, more expanded sequel that actually takes the player's decisions and dialogue choices into account. But let's say that BioWare was forced to rush ME3... Let us examine the possibilities:

1. Squad makeup

Since any squad member can die in ME2, I doubt BioWare will take the time to flesh out each squadmate in ME2 any further. For example, let's say that Tali lives in my game, but doesn't live in someone else's game. Will BioWare really write extra dialogue for Tali just so that those who had her live in the end get to have her as a squadmate once again and listen to some extra dialogue? At best, BioWare may make that extra effort, but the more pessimistic side of me says that nearly every ME2 squadmate will be reduced to playing cameo roles because of this. If they live, then great! You get to see them for five minutes in ME3 before they disappear from Mass Effect forever! The transition from ME1 to ME2 and how ME1 characters were handled there is proof of this.

Thus, it only seems fitting that BioWare retire the current crop of ME2 squadmates and bring in some new people. The squad may end up looking something like this:

1. Ashley/Kaidan (depending on lived on Virmire)
2. Liara (obvious given, since she can't be killed)

The remainder of the squad will be filled in by completely new squadmates or minor characters from either ME1 or ME2 who could not be killed in any way. Furthermore, any ME2 squadmates who lived will have small five to ten minute cameo roles.

2. Player Decisions

The decision of whether to save the council or not in ME1 had few ramifications in ME2. Likewise, destroying the Collector Base (or not!) will probably have few ramifications in ME3. If you destroyed the Collector Base, you will eventually get your hands on some vital Reaper technology anyways in ME3!

Conclusion

Mass Effect 3 has some pretty big shoes to fill, and seeing how little decisions in ME1 mattered - like Ashley and Kaidan having the same lines, the Council still being douches regardless of who's in it, I have serious doubts that BioWare has the capacity to really make our choices count for the finale. Most likely, BioWare will be reduced to either using deus ex machinimas to bring back certain squadmates from the dead, or reduce them to cameo appearances only. Branching storylines that differ from game to game clearly is not BioWare's specialty, so be warned! Mass Effect 3 may be a disappointment.

Modifié par XX55XX, 08 mars 2010 - 10:11 .

[JeanLuc761]

I refuse to sway one direction or another on this until Bioware actually starts talking about the game. Though, it's worth remembering that the engine is done so they can focus their full effort on the storyline. Given the success of this trilogy thus far, I find it very, very hard to believe that Mass Effect 3 will toss all your previous decisions in the crapper. Hell, I'd be stunned if Bioware didn't take the time to flesh out characters even more, even though they might have died in ME2. It would make literally zero sense to spend 1-2 games developing all these characters to toss them away for the finale.



Only time will tell.

[ZennExile]

Common sense isn't welcome round these parts...

[XX55XX]

JeanLuc761 wrote...

I refuse to sway one direction or another on this until Bioware actually starts talking about the game. Though, it's worth remembering that the engine is done so they can focus their full effort on the storyline. Given the success of this trilogy thus far, I find it very, very hard to believe that Mass Effect 3 will toss all your previous decisions in the crapper. Hell, I'd be stunned if Bioware didn't take the time to flesh out characters even more, even though they might have died in ME2. It would make literally zero sense to spend 1-2 games developing all these characters to toss them away for the finale.

Only time will tell.

I am just extropolating from what the transition from ME1 to ME2 tells us. If ME2 is any indication, they created too many characters and it is forseeable that some of these characters will be reduced to cameo appearances only. Characters like Zaaed and Morinth are prime candidates for this sort of treatment, but I can't see why such a practice might not extend to other well-liked characters like Garrus and Tali as well. I can imagine that if Tali lives in your game, she might not be a squadmate. Tali might be an admiral in the Migrant Fleet, and you get to meet her for ten minutes before she disappears from the game forever, before showing up in the end with a few pithy lines. The writers can only do so much.

Modifié par XX55XX, 08 mars 2010 - 04:06 .

[Chuvvy]

As long as at least Garrus or Wrex are in ME3 I'm fine.

[XX55XX]

Slidell505 wrote...

As long as at least Garrus or Wrex are in ME3 I'm fine.

Yeah, they will be in the game if they lived, but will they be your squadmates? That is the question! They might not, if ME2 is any indication.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Well, Garrus is an optional character in ME 1, so it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to see him in party in ME 3.



It would probably just come down to how much money they are willing to spend on VA

[Suron]

your first point is flawed..bad....



BioWare probably won't bother with fleshing out companions with loyalty type quests...that doesn't mean you won't have quite a bit of interaction in them during missions and BS talking on the Normandy..



And I doubt BioWare put all that work into ME2 companions just to ditch them (ME1 comps just got shoved into ME3 which is why other then Garrus/Tali etc only had small parts in ME2)



So the more accurate, thing to see is that BioWare will probably MAYBE give us a filler companion maybe or something for those that died but I doubt we'll see any NEW ones..ME3 will have enough to finish up with the Reapers rather then add a bunch of loyalty missions again...but hey if they wanna add more companions to make ME3 LONGER then I"m fall all of the above.



Why? because being able to die makes no difference in who they are or are not going to include in ME3...MOST people will strive to save everyone..and idealy everyone survives....which ties into why I doubt we'll see new companions..they'll have enough work with the existing...

[Karstedt]

I'm more worried about the 'streamlining' of the game. It could turn into and outright FPS.

[SurfaceBeneath]

It'll be a huge disappointment if you put unrealistic expectations on it.



Stop expecting it to be anything other than a good game.

[XX55XX]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Well, Garrus is an optional character in ME 1, so it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to see him in party in ME 3.

It would probably just come down to how much money they are willing to spend on VA

Garrus was actually optional? I thought only Wrex was. Plothole!

[Sialater]

You can't compare the transition from ME1 to ME2. ME1 was written as a standalone, with the possibility of a trilogy. ME2 was written with the clear intent of a sequel.



ME1 would only have had a sequel if it did well, therefore, they couldn't rely on everything in it completely. ME1 was a huge gamble being that it was a brand new IP with no following whatsoever. The closest analog would be the Original Trilogy of Star Wars.

[XX55XX]

Karstedt wrote...

I'm more worried about the 'streamlining' of the game. It could turn into and outright FPS.

Yes, that is what I am telling you all! They might make the game more linear than advertised. The fact that the player can make decisions without experiencing major ramifications is proof that BioWare is merely trying to create an illusion of choice in the game, rather than seriously implementing it!

[Onyx Jaguar]

XX55XX wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Well, Garrus is an optional character in ME 1, so it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to see him in party in ME 3.

It would probably just come down to how much money they are willing to spend on VA

Garrus was actually optional? I thought only Wrex was. Plothole!

Yep, there is slightly different dialogue when talking to him on Omega during recruitment but Shepard and Garrus know each other because they meet at Citadel Tower and later on at C-Sec, other than that yes plothole.

Bigger plothole is when you ask TIM about Wrex and he says he's at Tuchanka even if you didn't have him in your party.  That is rectified when Wreav is clan leader but it still got my hopes up (no save I have has Kaiden and Wrex alive together, damn speedruns).

[Onyx Jaguar]

Karstedt wrote...

I'm more worried about the 'streamlining' of the game. It could turn into and outright FPS.

For that they'd have to do a complete engine rewrite, waste of time.

[cruc1al]

If you already know that ME3 will not be what you want it to be, you won't be disappointed with it. That's the plus side of being pessimistic; you don't get negative surprises.

On the other hand, you don't have to set the bar so high that you have to be pessimistic about reaching it.

Modifié par cruc1al, 08 mars 2010 - 04:15 .

[netleopard54]

I reserve judgment, but have faith that Bioware will do a good job, as i feel they have done on me1 and me2.



I don't think anyone not on the bioware development team can assume, what they may or may not do with characters. Everything outside of the development team is conjecture. I felt like a lot of the decisions I made in ME1 were reflected in me2 and i can see a pattern arise for how the different decisions you make in me2 could affect the outcome in me3 (like saving or deleting genophase cure data). I think that your interactions with specific squad mates was written very well and true to the individual characters. ash/kaidon are still alliance solders through and through, and liara's story is explained in the dark horse comics. well thats my .5 cents take it for what its worth.



Cheers!

[kraidy1117]

If you don't like it, then don't buy it. It's that simple. Theres no need to complain.

[RighteousRage]

"Oh no this game does not fit my standards, I am ultimately disappointed"

[KnotEngaged]

Given how much backlash BioWare has seen from the decision to sideline most of the ME1 squaddies; I doubt they will do the same with ME2 squaddies in ME3. They got away with it in ME2 because there is the promise of seeing sidelined ME1 characters in ME3. However, there isn't a ME4 to promise seeing sidelined ME2 characters in if they aren't in ME3, so you would be a total wash in terms of character development to not include the potential for every ME1 and ME2 sqauddie to have a substantial role.

Its not like BioWare hasn't written parts for characters that can be totally ignored before. Wrex and Garrus don't have to be recruited in ME1, and Legion, Tali, Grunt, Zaeed, Samara, and Thane don't have to be reruited in ME2, plus you can ignore and loyalty mission you want.

I stand by my feeling that the more squaddies you have survive the suicide mission in ME2 will equal more squaddies available to you in ME3. Pretty simple I think, and a great way to reward players for keeping everyone alive in ME2.

[XX55XX]

kraidy1117 wrote...

If you don't like it, then don't buy it. It's that simple. Theres no need to complain.

I will buy it. I am not complaining. I am merely conjecturing on what ME3 might be like in terms of character interaction. That doesn't mean that ME3 will have a poor storyline. Please read my post before dismissing it as another petty complaint.

[mundus66]

Actually ME2 had a lot of fan service. Both the Tali and Garrus romance was pretty much response to fans.

Two other characters who a lot of people said should be romance able or at least flings are Shiala (the asari from Feros) and Parasini (the woman from Noveria). And they are both killable in ME1, still if they are alive in this game, they will flirt with Shepard if you help them.

So i do think that ME3 will listen to their fans = most of the characters will return. Hell all should return (and be playable) except those with a damn good reason, like Thane.

As for decisions carrying over, remember that ME3 will be the last game in the trilogy, so i think a lot of things will carry over and make huge impacts on the game.

This whole game is about building your team and be out in the terminus systems. Which is why a lot of the decisions doesn't matter much, since they aren't even part of the main story, you don't even have to go to the citadel if you don't want to.

Also you spent a whole game building a team, why should they split up if they survived ME2? The characters actually don't have much dialoge outside of their loyalty and recruit missions. Other than Miranda and Jacob in between the missions, but thats beacuse they are always there and cant die until the end. So putting back all the characters wouldn't be so hard, but they wouldn't play a huge part like most characters already don't do in this.

ME3 will probably change quite a bit, depending if you saved the reaper base or not, or let the rachni live or not etc.

[Nozybidaj]

XX55XX wrote...
Thus, it only seems fitting that BioWare retire the current crop of ME2 squadmates and bring in some new people. The squad may end up looking something like this:

1. Ashley/Kaidan (depending on lived on Virmire)
2. Liara (obvious given, since she can't be killed)

The remainder of the squad will be filled in by completely new squadmates or minor characters from either ME1 or ME2 who could not be killed in any way. Furthermore, any ME2 squadmates who lived will have small five to ten minute cameo roles.

That would be just about perfect.

[screwoffreg]

We have heard the first argument a million times and it holds NO water. Bioware said that there will be dire consequences for your decisions and that includes Shepard dying = no ME 3 for that character. It also will likely mean if you lost team members, then you LOST them and that means you may have a smaller squad as a result of being incredibly illiterate (you have to try REALLY hard to lose a lot of squadmates). More than that, EVERY Bioware game pretty much has allowed you to solo the questline, even if that means never hearing the many, many words of dialogue each character had for them. That doesn't mean Bioware doesn't CREATE the characters and their backstory, it just means you can ignore them if you are so inclined.