285 réponses à ce sujet

[Blackveldt]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Sure I do, but is it going to impact your ability to win the game? 

How can you be certain that it will not?  Perhaps there will be an ending in ME3 where you, the player, loses just like you could die in ME2.  Perhaps the loss of squadmates (in name or number) could contribute to this.  Mass Effect would not be the first RPG to do this (have a 'bad' ending).  We can conjecture all we want, but in the end, it is all guesswork and assumptions.  And I try to stay away from making assumptions.

[Ecael]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Then she should have mentioned that Nyxeris, her assistant, has biotic abilities similar to Liara, and is in fact, working for the Shadow Broker as the Observer. Liara even confides in you outright (assuming the mission is completed successfully) that if it weren't for you, Nyxeris could have jumped her at any time with the advantage, especially once she got suspicious. 

The entire quest you that.

Liara tells you that.

Now consider: Why would a seemingly minor quest with a major character like that be in the game if it did not have consequences for doing it wrong?

Now consider: Why would a massively important character be relegated to a minor quest, and told that its to make sure she doesnt get killed and block off whats been planned for her in ME3, only to have her killed as a consequence to said minor quest and block off whats been planned for her in ME3?

Another Liara fan, I assume? I should take this into consideration when I'm writing all these threads.

If you followed the thread, the other Liara fans are saying that they're disappointed Liara doesn't get much screen time because they think BioWare's writers are idiots or that they will direct this...err... hate them personally. Some of them (including Nozybidaj from previous threads) argue that no squadmate will return - including Liara - because of Liara's treatment in ME2.

They say this, even though everyone believes that every single squadmate in Mass Effect can be killed except for Liara. She is invincible and all-knowing in everyone's eyes, but apparently she will be useless in ME2 and ME3 in almost everyone's eyes as well.

That seems fairly contradictory, if you ask me. Unless, of course, there is the very slight possibility that Liara can die.

The quest given to you by Liara is almost impossible to fail if you complete all the nodes. Even if you can't decide and try to cancel out after revealing the last node, you'll soon realize that the 'Exit' option in the dialogue wheel is replaced by the correct answer. You literally cannot fail unless you are intentionally negligent.

Sure I do, but is it going to impact your ability to win the game? 
Bioware gave us the ability to let them die.  If you got them killed an
imported, they would not be in ME3.  Unless they were resurrected or
Bioware just said "screw it they are alive".  Does that mean you can't
win the game?  This is my point.  Yes they impact the story, but not the
mission or the endgame.  Just like killing Wrex in ME1.  Yeah, you get
treated differently on Tuchanka if you killed him in ME1.  This affects
the Mass Effect story, but not the game.  Hence small roles if they are
alive.

Why wouldn't it? Why should people engage in black-and-white thinking and say "Oh, Tali can/cannot die or affect the plot, because if she does, you will automatically lose or win the game upon importing!".

Incorrect. Tali and Legion will have an influence on the next game, and those influences will be additive. That means if they're dead, you either gain or lose a slight advantage against the upcoming final battle with the Reapers. It doesn't mean the plot has to vary drastically - as you can see with the CGI used in ME2, Paragon and Renegade choices result in either a 'blue' or 'red' pulse for Heretic Station, a 'blue' or 'red' pulse for destroying the main Collector base and even a 'blue' or 'red' sun to summarize the latter option.

The same applies to those two characters. Who knows, maybe if Legion survives there will be a bunch of geth ships inserted into the CGI cutscene for your Shepard. Not that hard to produce (the Reapers behind the main ones in the ending CGI of ME2 are basically little shapes copied and pasted over and over again). If Legion dies, you lose those geth ships - OR - the Reapers will have geth ships on their side. Again, not difficult to produce.

Those types of choices will go into determining whether or not you get the good-good ending, good-bad ending, bittersweet ending, bad-good ending, or even the bad-bad ending. After all, you can summarize all the choices and consequences in ME3 at the end because the series is coming to an end.

And yes, Wrex/Wreav wasn't handled well, but only because providing more options for Wrex/Wreav will complicate things (an option in ME1) going into ME3. We have yet to see what the actual result of killing Wrex on Virmire will do, don't we?

[Yeled]

I'm going to make the assumption that your ending in ME2 will not directly impact your ability to succeed in ME3. I think I'm fairly safe in making that assumption.

[jlb524]

Ecael wrote...

Then she should have mentioned that Nyxeris, her assistant, has biotic abilities similar to Liara, and is in fact, working for the Shadow Broker as the Observer. Liara even confides in you outright (assuming the mission is completed successfully) that if it weren't for you, Nyxeris could have jumped her at any time with the advantage, especially once she got suspicious. 

We still don't see this happening in game and you're just speculating on possibilities.  I can speculate too.  Let's say you don't help Liara, Nyxeris jumps her.  The battle will definitely be tougher than it was when Liara saw it coming but that's not to say Liara still wouldn't win.  It's implied that Liara is a much stronger biotic than Nyxeris.  She blew past her barriers no problem. 

[Barrendall]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Ecael wrote...
But anyway, Tali and Legion, even though Tali and Legion are 'young' in their own ways, are powerful, influential characters because they worked with Shepard. In addition, Tali is the daughter of one of the Admirals and is a Quarian hero for destroying the geth (she's not quite ready to take power though!) and Legion is THE representative of the true geth. Killing either ought to have major consequences, don't you think?

Sure I do, but is it going to impact your ability to win the game?  Bioware gave us the ability to let them die.  If you got them killed an imported, they would not be in ME3.  Unless they were resurrected or Bioware just said "screw it they are alive".  Does that mean you can't win the game?  This is my point.  Yes they impact the story, but not the mission or the endgame.  Just like killing Wrex in ME1.  Yeah, you get treated differently on Tuchanka if you killed him in ME1.  This affects the Mass Effect story, but not the game.  Hence small roles if they are alive.

It seems that you are speculating that the game is so linear that the game can be won despite our choices.  I'm not sure I hold to that.  In fact I would enjoy the opposite.  "Shep rides in with the only two people that managed to stay alive from the suicide mission and gets their asses handed to them."  Hell Johnny, who besides the writers of the game can honestly say there is even going to be a good ending to this story at all.

Modifié par Barrendall111, 15 mars 2010 - 06:45 .

[Yeled]

Ecael wrote...

If you followed the thread, the other Liara fans are saying that they're disappointed Liara doesn't get much screen time because they think BioWare's writers are idiots or that they will direct this...err... hate them personally. Some of them (including Nozybidaj from previous threads) argue that no squadmate will return - including Liara - because of Liara's treatment in ME2.

They say this, even though everyone believes that every single squadmate in Mass Effect can be killed except for Liara. She is invincible and all-knowing in everyone's eyes, but apparently she will be useless in ME2 and ME3 in almost everyone's eyes as well.

That seems fairly contradictory, if you ask me. Unless, of course, there is the very slight possibility that Liara can die.

The quest given to you by Liara is almost impossible to fail if you complete all the nodes. Even if you can't decide and try to cancel out after revealing the last node, you'll soon realize that the 'Exit' option in the dialogue wheel is replaced by the correct answer. You literally cannot fail unless you are intentionally negligent.

Actually, what most Liara fans think is that ME2 was less satisfying for them because Liara was intricately tied into their Shep's story, and because you couldn't interact with her in a satisfactory way.  They are disappointed that she wasn't a squadmate, but they are far more upset that they didn't handle her well at all in the game and that a major part of what was important to them in the story was put on hold for a third of the trilogy and what could be a four year period of time between games.

Furthermore, they believe that because of the way Liara was handled it is posssible and perhaps even likely that other characters who are important to other fans might get similar treatment, and that there is a lot of evidence to support this fear, even if its not a certainty.

Why wouldn't it? Why should people engage in black-and-white thinking and say "Oh, Tali can/cannot die or affect the plot, because if she does, you will automatically lose or win the game upon importing!".

Incorrect. Tali and Legion will have an influence on the next game, and those influences will be additive. That means if they're dead, you either gain or lose a slight advantage against the upcoming final battle with the Reapers. It doesn't mean the plot has to vary drastically - as you can see with the CGI used in ME2, Paragon and Renegade choices result in either a 'blue' or 'red' pulse for Heretic Station, a 'blue' or 'red' pulse for destroying the main Collector base and even a 'blue' or 'red' sun to summarize the latter option.

The same applies to those two characters. Who knows, maybe if Legion survives there will be a bunch of geth ships inserted into the CGI cutscene for your Shepard. Not that hard to produce (the Reapers behind the main ones in the ending CGI of ME2 are basically little shapes copied and pasted over and over again). If Legion dies, you lose those geth ships - OR - the Reapers will have geth ships on their side. Again, not difficult to produce.

Those types of choices will go into determining whether or not you get the good-good ending, good-bad ending, bittersweet ending, bad-good ending, or even the bad-bad ending. After all, you can summarize all the choices and consequences in ME3 at the end because the series is coming to an end.

And yes, Wrex/Wreav wasn't handled well, but only because providing more options for Wrex/Wreav will complicate things (an option in ME1) going into ME3. We have yet to see what the actual result of killing Wrex on Virmire will do, don't we?

Again, what most Liara fans believe is that, as you said, most of what you are describing hasn't been handled well thus far, and there is a distinct possibility that it will continue to be handled poorly in the future.  Liara fans are pessimistic because we've seen the worst possible outcome thus far, and our faith in BioWare is low.  We also tend to feel that most other fans are willfully ignorant of these facts because these fans haven't been as directly effected.  But the minute Tali shows up in a poorly handled cameo....look out!

[jlb524]

Yeled wrote...


Again, what most Liara fans believe is that, as you said, most of what you are describing hasn't been handled well thus far, and there is a distinct possibility that it will continue to be handled poorly in the future.  Liara fans are pessimistic because we've seen the worst possible outcome thus far, and our faith in BioWare is low.  We also tend to feel that most other fans are willfully ignorant of these facts because these fans haven't been as directly effected.  But the minute Tali shows up in a poorly handled cameo....look out!

Well said Yeled.  I think your interpretation of the Liara fan's attidtude towards the series is better than Ecael's (maybe b/c you're an acutal Liara fan ).

[Yeled]

jlb524 wrote...

Yeled wrote...


Again, what most Liara fans believe is that, as you said, most of what you are describing hasn't been handled well thus far, and there is a distinct possibility that it will continue to be handled poorly in the future.  Liara fans are pessimistic because we've seen the worst possible outcome thus far, and our faith in BioWare is low.  We also tend to feel that most other fans are willfully ignorant of these facts because these fans haven't been as directly effected.  But the minute Tali shows up in a poorly handled cameo....look out!

Well said Yeled.  I think your interpretation of the Liara fan's attidtude towards the series is better than Ecael's (maybe b/c you're an acutal Liara fan ).

Thanks.  I even have the membership card you sent in my wallet! 

[Blackveldt]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Blackveldt wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Sure I do, but is it going to impact your ability to win the game? 

How can you be certain that it will not?  Perhaps there will be an ending in ME3 where you, the player, loses just like you could die in ME2.  Perhaps the loss of squadmates (in name or number) could contribute to this.  Mass Effect would not be the first RPG to do this (have a 'bad' ending).  We can conjecture all we want, but in the end, it is all guesswork and assumptions.  And I try to stay away from making assumptions.

If that was the case then the player would have to go buy a copy of ME2 and save the characters and then import just to win ME3.

It would be a great marketing strategy.  But you are also assuming that the default Shepard cannot lose when there may exist the possibility (to lose) for an imported one.  Rather illogical.

Right, as I stated earlier Bioware can throw us for a loop and do whatever they want.
I think assumptions with logical/feasible/plausible results, and drawing from past examples are not a bad thing in this argument since we simply do not know and have no way of knowing right now and someone started the thread. 

What I meant was that you were providing theories based upon questionable assumptions.  If I assume that Liara will die no matter what, then I can come up with any number of conclusions based on this.  However, my conclusions will most likely be in error since they were based upon a faulty assumption.  It is your assumption(s) with which I find fault, not necessarily your theorizing and hypotheses.

In any case, ME2 is a rare and unique exception in the gaming world; it is the bridge of a trilogy.  ME3 is the finale--the end; the writers will have a lot more freedom to provide different stories/endings/etc.  It will be a very different game in terms of plot and outcome.

Modifié par Blackveldt, 15 mars 2010 - 07:02 .

[Knoll Argonar]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Blackveldt wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Sure I do, but is it going to impact your ability to win the game? 

How can you be certain that it will not?  Perhaps there will be an ending in ME3 where you, the player, loses just like you could die in ME2.  Perhaps the loss of squadmates (in name or number) could contribute to this.  Mass Effect would not be the first RPG to do this (have a 'bad' ending).  We can conjecture all we want, but in the end, it is all guesswork and assumptions.  And I try to stay away from making assumptions.

If that was the case then the player would have to go buy a copy of ME2 and save the characters and then import just to win ME3.
Right, as I stated earlier Bioware can throw us for a loop and do whatever they want.
I think assumptions with logical/feasible/plausible results, and drawing from past examples are not a bad thing in this argument since we simply do not know and have no way of knowing right now and someone started the thread. 

Why? Default Shepard could just have the necessary set up to win the game, but the option to lose it anyway, like ME2. But an imported set up could have only one outcome that makes you lose -> because you did something wrong.

The only ones that could actually "lose" the game would be the ones that previously had ME2 and ME1.

Everything is speculative, but it's not "illogic" to think that ME2 characters could matter in ME3.

So,let's say, without the Geth support, you lose some Turian homeplanet. Without the Quarian support, they all go to war with the Geth and get killed and, therefore, some Asari Homeplanet gets boomed. Wreav instead of Wrex? You don't have a Krogan Union, therefore some other system gets killed by Reapers. And more variables to consider on the possible outcomes. All in one game, without considering the consequences because THERE won't be an ME4.

Those outcomes could have little consequences by themselves, but put all together, Shepard and the Galaxy could get Doomed.

It's possible to have those ME2 characters with important plot-relations in the Game, because there's nothing stopping Bioware from letting the Reapers win if you don't do what's necessary.

So, it's logic, it's possible, and it's even the easiest way to have a valid crew in ME3 to make your old Squaddies back.

In ME1 your crew was redundant and unspecialised, so you need experts for ME2. With those experts, there's no need for new characters in ME3, aside for some for refresh.

EDIT: Some hilarious typos here and there.

Modifié par Knoll Argonar, 15 mars 2010 - 07:22 .

[phimseto]

Whoops...I guess this is where the thread is actually being discussed. Here's what I posted in the other forum:



You're right, and they probably will listen to fans. I still can't believe the hue and cry regarding not having each and every character back from ME1. From a storytelling sense, I thought Bioware did a good job of explaining each character's absence away. I'm not sure how workable a decision that is for ME3, though. If I had to guess, here's what Bioware would do.



You will recruit a core group as your "through the game" team. This will be mostly new characters, with a few returning characters (Garrus most obviously).



Some characters will be a part of your crew, but not a part of your ground team. Mordin might be your full-time researcher, if he lived. Liara would be on your crew, but as an information analyst. Ashley/Kaidan show up as your XO. Etc. etc. This way, they're "on the crew" but Bioware isn't wedded to having to write for them in every non-ship scene.



I suspect that, in order to honor the large cast, you'll also (a la Kingdom Hearts) situationally play with certain characters: teaming up with Wrex and Grunt on a Krogan reunification mission, Tali and Legion on a mission to the Quarian homeworld, Jacob and Miranda on a Cerberus-related mission, Zaeed on a Blue Suns mission. That way, you can play at least part of the game with the characters you want, if not the whole.



Finally, what they definitely will do is give you the option of recruiting any of your old teammates for the final set of missions, provided they are still around and not otherwise committed (like Wrex leading the krogan or Zaeed leading the Blue Suns, and even then it might be negotiable). By doing so, they answer what would have been the biggest complaint: "I wanted 'x' on my final mission!"



I wouldn't mind if they did it that way. My only request, as it were, was that they made it possible to have something of an ongoing dialogue with all of your old playable characters, talking about the evolving situation, and squaring away some personal business, etc.



Another advantage to doing the game this way is that it makes the game feel more epic: these other characters are your agents/teammates, out there organizing on behalf of your mission. When you land into the middle of whatever lynchpin moment they find themselves in, it's like your management flying in to seal the deal. They give you the report, and then you close things out together.

[Ecael]

jlb524 wrote...

Ecael wrote...

Then she should have mentioned that Nyxeris, her assistant, has biotic abilities similar to Liara, and is in fact, working for the Shadow Broker as the Observer. Liara even confides in you outright (assuming the mission is completed successfully) that if it weren't for you, Nyxeris could have jumped her at any time with the advantage, especially once she got suspicious. 

We still don't see this happening in game and you're just speculating on possibilities.  I can speculate too.  Let's say you don't help Liara, Nyxeris jumps her.  The battle will definitely be tougher than it was when Liara saw it coming but that's not to say Liara still wouldn't win.  It's implied that Liara is a much stronger biotic than Nyxeris.  She blew past her barriers no problem.

Speculating on possibilties like whether or not every other squadmate will actually return in Mass Effect? I'm glad I got you to start thinking optimistically about Liara, but still, wouldn't that be unjust to fans of every other character?

As I mentioned before, whether you see them die or not, or whether you like that character or not, the end-all of which characters returns or not is decided by:

1. The writers

and

2. The voice actors

In most TV shows with main and recurring characters, if the actor dies, they don't go and replace him or her immediately with another actor to play the same character. Most of the time, they will have to write them out of the story -- thus EVERY character has to have some legitimate way to die. The main Mass Effect series is not a book, where a writer has complete control over who lives and who dies. You have to write around the fact that actors may not be available.

For example: Admiral Hackett (Lance Hendricksen) sends you e-mails, but your Shepard nor he ever communicate with each other. As it turns out to the disappointment of some fans, he was working on other games and couldn't do Mass Effect simultaneously.

Actors can also die, walk out out of job with or without a contract, or simply be unavailable in some form or another. Unless you think the voice actors themselves are invincible in their own right (and yes, Ali Hillis as Liara is not immortal - and she does have other obligations like her role of Lightning in Final Fantasy XIII), then you can't be ultimately certain who will be in Mass Effect 3.

Or would you prefer someone like Claudia Black to replace her as Liara should Ali Hillis become unavailable? She's very good at tweaking her American accent to sound entirely different - and she already plays at least two Asari in Mass Effect 2.

jlb524 wrote...

Yeled wrote...


Again,
what most Liara fans believe is that, as you said, most of what you are
describing hasn't been handled well thus far, and there is a distinct
possibility that it will continue to be handled poorly in the future. 
Liara fans are pessimistic because we've seen the worst possible outcome
thus far, and our faith in BioWare is low.  We also tend to feel that
most other fans are willfully ignorant of these facts because these fans
haven't been as directly effected.  But the minute Tali shows up in a
poorly handled cameo....look out!

Well said Yeled.  I
think your interpretation of the Liara fan's attidtude towards the
series is better than Ecael's (maybe b/c you're an acutal Liara fan [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/cool.png[/smilie]).

And I never said I was a Liara fan. Like I've said many times over, I don't show any personal bias toward any character in the game - I don't have to in order to understand, predict, or write about what I think of the story. In fact, being biased on a topic affects your opinion of it, does it not? You can value her opinion more, but that's still confirmation bias -- and also groupthink.

Furthermore, they believe that because of the way Liara was handled it
is posssible and perhaps even likely that other characters who are
important to other fans might get similar treatment, and that there is a
lot of evidence to support this fear, even if its not a certainty.

And that's the point - it's not a certainty - nothing is. You can talk about what the fans fear, but whether or not a character will return will not drastically affect sales or the critics' reactions to Mass Effect 3. It also won't affect people's reactions to new characters should all the squadmates be replaced (and trust me, this is the worst idea or path to take). Even then, it's not like people won't develop attachments to the new characters. There are support threads for all the new characters in ME2, is there not?

If that was the case then the player would have to go buy a copy of
ME2 and save the characters and then import just to win ME3.

Because it's not like the New Game defaulted Shepard featured in this game made all the wrong or Renegade choices, essentially removing perks and content from the game for those who didn't import? Believe it or not, a publisher can have an influence on how the game works, and sometimes it will be in such a subtle way to gain profit without charging the customer upfront. This will be a much bigger deal when ME3 comes, when default Shepard will again make all the bad choices and people new to Mass Effect will have to buy Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 to get the perfect ending.

Is it wrong? That depends on how you view it. Right now, each Mass Effect is written to be modular - it draws from the changes of the last game, but it also has to act as a standalone game in the case that someone wants to buy Mass Effect 2 but only Mass Effect 2. The same applies to Mass Effect 3. If you buy only that game, you can still get a good ending, but no one said it's going to be the best one. Still, you can complete that game, and that's all that matters.

Casey Hudson originally had promised that the New Game Shepard would have some control over the choices that he made previously - either through the in-game interview between Shepard, Jacob and Miranda or through a New Game Shepard editor that he promised. Two things happened:

1. The in-game interview was shortened dramatically (that's why the option of 'We're done here' is the neutral option - to skip the past choices of ME1 and go directly to the game for those who don't want to wait) and only affected who you chose for Councilor since the imported save doesn't record it.

2. The New Game Shepard editor promised to be at the beginning of the game turned out to be a 'developer's only console' with Casey saying 'Sorry, I thought it was an option available to all players'. Would you believe that statement coming from the Lead Designer is a truly honest one -- that he doesn't know how his own game begins?

Needless to say, those types of promises (and even assumptions made hearing it from Casey himself) need to be avoided for the next chapter.

[Blackveldt]

[quote]JohnnyDollar wrote...

That is illogical?  Maybe my logic is flawed then.  Forcing gamers to have to buy and play the the 1st and/or 2nd game(s) and save certain charcters just to win the 3rd game in the trilogy is quite a far leap to me.[/quote]

You are thinking in absolutes.  I wasn't suggesting that gamers would be forced (I merely commented on how great a marketing strategy that might be).  I originally stated that there may exist the possibility of having a bad ending (losing) in ME3.  You took this to mean that a gamer would have to purchase ME2 in order to not lose; I didn't quite see the relevance and direct correlation, but I obliged.  I see the potential to both be able to win and lose with either an imported or default Shepard.

[quote]Give me a better assumtion then.[/quote]
I'm not sure if you read everything I wrote, but I stated that this is why I stay away from making assumptions.  I prefer hypothesizing based upon facts.  However, this is not to say I outright boycott assumptions, but they're more along the lines of:  Shepard will have the opportunity to face The Shadowbroker.  Notice it's not:  Shepard will defeat/kill/etc The Shadowbroker because I must consider all possible outcomes.  Therefore, any assumptions I decide to make will leave room for development.  Linear assumptions are ones for which you have to wary.


[quote]In any case, ME2 is a rare and unique exception in the gaming world; it is the bridge of a trilogy.  ME3 is the finale--the end; the writers will have a lot more freedom to provide different stories/endings/etc.  It will be a very different game in terms of plot and outcome.
[/quote]
Agreed.

[/quote]

So you agree that there exists the possibility that you can "lose" in ME3?  I don't want to sound snarky, but I don't know how else to word this right now.

Modifié par Blackveldt, 15 mars 2010 - 07:50 .

[jlb524]

Ecael wrote...

Speculating on possibilties like whether or not every other squadmate will actually return in Mass Effect? I'm glad I got you to start thinking optimistically about Liara, but still, wouldn't that be unjust to fans of every other character?

I don't think BW is going to worry about what is 'just' and what isn't.  I still think they'll simply bring back the 4 or 5 most popular ME2 characters and reduce the remaining to cameos. Is it just to the fans of those characters?  No.  Was it just to do the same with Ash/Kai/Liara in ME2?  No.  Did they still do it?  Yes.

I'm aware that Liara's VA could be unavailable and that they could kill off her character b/c of this.  I'm not sure what that has to do with anything though.  They don't even need the Nyxeris plot to accomplish this...they could just have Liara die in a freak accident.  They could say she just ran off and disappeared making her no longer available to recruit in ME3. 

[Barrendall]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Barrendall111 wrote...
It seems that you are speculating that the game is so linear that the game can be won despite our choices.  I'm not sure I hold to that.  In fact I would enjoy the opposite.  "Shep rides in with the only two people that managed to stay alive from the suicide mission and gets their asses handed to them."  Hell Johnny, who besides the writers of the game can honestly say there is going to be a good ending to this story at all.

Think about it though, it has been so far.
Doesn't matter if you killed the council.  Doesn't matter if you killed Wrex.  Doesn't matter if you killed the Rachni.  I will also say that I doubt it will matter if you saved the Collector Base.  This ties into the "Big Decisions" debate about your choices.

Indeed only the writers know.  My posts though, are referring mainly to charcter roles and their impacts on the game vs whether or not the ending is bad or good. 
Edit:  Hence you could still win the game regardless.

Mass Effect and DA remind me ot the Choose your own Adventure books in my youth.  They were great, you couldn't read the last page of the book and know how it ended because there were many types of endings and very few ended on the last page.  My point is that the character roles should have an effect.  I'm looking at the big picture here.  What happened to the characters in ME1 may have real consequenses (Not sure if I spelled that right)  in ME3.  For any of us to say it does or doesn't is incredibly egotistical.  
Yes the game may be won regardless but I'm hesitant to speculate until I have some hard facts.

[Knoll Argonar]

[quote]JohnnyDollar wrote...

[quote]Knoll Argonar wrote...
Why? Default Shepard could just have the necessary set up to win the game, but the option to lose it anyway, like ME2. But an imported set up could have only one outcome that makes you lose -> because you did something wrong.[/quote]
I'll buy into the first part, but not necessarily the second.  Indeed none of us know for sure fo course.  Your second point, although possible sounds a little too rigid to me.

[quote]The only ones that could actually "lose" the game would be the ones that previously had ME2 and ME1.[/quote]
This is good theory that I haven't thought of.  It sounds a little rigid too me though.

[quote]Everything is speculative, but it's not "illogic" to think that ME2 characters could matter in ME3.[/quote]
You make a good point.  The story has been linear so far, where frankly our choices don't matter and the game is won regardless of who dies.  This is what I am basing my assumptions on.

[quote]So,let's say, without the Geth support, you lose some Turian homeplanet. Without the Quarian support, they all go to war with the Geth and get killed and, therefore, some Asari Homeplanet gets boomed. Wreav instead of Wrex? You don't have a Krogan Union, therefore some other system gets killed by Reapers. And more variables to consider on the possible outcomes. All in one game, without considering the consequences because THERE won't be an ME4.[/quote]
So you would have to have ME1 and/or ME3 and replay those and import again to win ME3.  Possible of course, but it sounds to me like that is demanding a lot of the player.[/quote]
That would be interesting.  We all will just have to wait.  I am just not ecpecting that much out of it though.  If that is the case though, then the game will exceed my expectations.

[/quote]

Not rigid at all.

I think you have to carefully plan all your MISTAKES if you want to screw up the Suicide mission and only get two squaddies back. I think it's obvious that Bioware will think that those people don't expect that save to be their "canon" save, the same way they dismissed those people that not recruited Garrus back in ME1.

I think that Bioware will at least say: "hey, you guys earned it. You put so much effort in screwing the whole trilogy that, actually, you did." BOOM.

Again, if it's all about speculate, I'd say that having Wrex dead won't kill your save game. But, at the same time, the Happy Ending won't totally be there. But, who cares? If you started the trilogy with ME2/ME3, you will not even notice that.

[Blackveldt]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

Blackveldt wrote...
I'm not sure if you read everything I wrote, but I stated that this is why I stay away from making assumptions.  I prefer hypothesizing based upon facts.  However, this is not to say I don't outright boycott assumptions, but they're more along the lines of:  Shepard will have the opportunity to face The Shadowbroker.  Notice it's not:  Shepard will defeat/kill/etc The Shadowbroker because I must consider all possible outcomes.  Therefore, any assumptions I decide to make will leave room for development.  Linear assumptions are ones for which you have to wary.

Assumptions and prior knowledge of ME1 and ME2 are all that we have in this discussion though Blackveldt.

Uh, yes.  I stated this.  I also made an assumption of my own--a better one.  But there are different kinds of assumptions (faulty and otherwise) that can be made.  A non-linear assumption is still an assumption.  I'm not sure what you're getting at.  You can make all the assumptions you want, but your conclusion will make more sense/have more plausibility if the assumption is not faulty; that is all I am saying.

No I agree the writers will have a lot more freedom to provide different stories/endings/etc.

Being able to lose in ME3 qualifies as a different ending.

EDIT:  Stupid quotes.

Modifié par Blackveldt, 15 mars 2010 - 07:58 .

[DirtyVagrant]

Considering how there has been remarks of there being more Mass Effect after the planned trilogy, opening up a "oh, Shepard failed and the Reapers ate the galaxy" option doesn't seem very feasible.