27765 réponses à ce sujet

[P. Domi]

Nice comments by Yannick Roy. I personally loved the Mako and finding things that weren' shown on the map at first. ME 2 allowed to use those resources and assets you found to improve your gear, weapons and the ship (which was a great addition, in my opinion). I think these two features are compatible.

Rather than eliminating planet surface exploration altogether, they could offer more than one way to do it, you could take a longer route by indeed exploring and being rewarded for it, while those who don't enjoy it so much won't have their experiences or storyline hindered at all but will still reap some benefits from planet scanning/probing.

A middle road solution would be to simply reward those who want to take the time to explore planets (and find the 'shifty cow', for instance), without hindering the story development of those who did not enjoy the Mako exploration at all. This rewards may entail faster access to key resources that may be obtained in other ways (resources that help you upgrading), faster experience acc thanks to exploration and scientific/archeological discoveries etc, even if these things are not necessary to have a fully satisfactory experience or to have access to all quests and missions.

Modifié par pablodomi, 23 juillet 2013 - 09:07 .

[kobayashi-maru]

shingara wrote...

What ever they do i hope to hell the next batch have real boss fights at then end like 1 and 2 did.

That's why I like addition of GOW dev. ME has always been same strip shield/barrier/armour and attack till dead (bar the Atlas mech where you could aim for glass and hijack). The enemies in GOW had more variation where you had to hit specific points or use specific weapons while shooting most minions as usual. The weapons also have execution moves with the chainsaw etc and this took away a lot of the it's just another shooter aspects. I'll add Chris Wynn on Twitter and check out if he has dropped any hints.

And off topic but my fingers to big for nexus 7 hence inclusion of this pointless  which got added due to my aforementioned digits:)

Modifié par kobayashi-maru, 23 juillet 2013 - 05:53 .

[Phoenix_Also_Rises]

My cautious optimism is gone. Only optimism remains.

[Shermos]

Guys, I don't think this thread will be closed because of discussion related to the next game. It's not even truly off topic, because the tweets being posted right now are about the next game. It's naturally going to bring up discussion. It would be different if ending haters came in whining about the ending and people who liked it got into a flame war with them.  

Epic777 wrote...

One problem I can see, the ME universe is not well built for a prequel

Exactly. There isn't much room for an interesting story which doesn't interfere with the first trilogy. Sure it could be done, but it wouldn't have that same feeling of exploring the unkown which was so important in the first trilogy. Even a Terminus systems plot is limited by the first trilogy. The only way to bring back that feeling we had playing ME1 is to set the game at some point after ME3. I've compared such a game to Star Trek: The Next Generation. It opened up the Trek universe enough for 7 seasons worth of stories plus another 2 spin off series with more being possible in the future. Now think about Enterprise (a prequel series). It had some good episodes but it only managed to stay alive for four seasons and isn't well liked by the fan base. One of the reasons for this was it being too limited. It ended up conflicting with the earlier shows as it was.

It's been suggested that the new Comic series is meant to open the door for a prequel. I don't agree. As you can see in the link I posted below, the upcoming releases deal with characters and backstory from the original trilogy. They're more like the comics which dealt with the first contact war and the genesis of Cerberus. They fill in some gaps for the hardcore fans.  

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Mass_Effect:_Foundation

And just to remind people about Yanick Roy's comments about the next game, he made them last year AFTER Hudson had talked about a prequel. Roy said a few things including making a World War 1 and 2 analogy (the events of the 1st war influenced the second but it wasn't a direct continuation) which strongly indicated that a sequel was at least being thought about. I'd say given all the fan feedback that Hudsun has changed his tune in favour of a sequel.   

[ElitePinecone]

I think Foundation is actually more likely to be fleshing out the period before 2183 so that a prequel or 'sidequel' *can* take place, but we're probably going to disagree.

As far as I can tell the original intention was never to make anything set after ME3.

For example, in the development process of the third game Bioware concept artist Matt Rhodes drew some images of what the galaxy could look like "in the far, far future" after each ending.

Here's his concept art of Synthesis producing a human/asari/salarian hybrid due to the effects of species mixing and overcoming the limits of habitation using technology:



Whether the idea (that ME3 was the end of the series chronologically) has changed or not is something that's up for debate, but I think the obstacles to a sequel are pretty enormous, and the telegraphing that the game really was the end is fairly heavy. Looking at the language the devs used around the launch of Citadel could be pretty instructive, I'd think.

Finally, I don't think it's productive to assume that "responding to fan feedback" is the most important factor they'll use when deciding when the sequel is set - and that's not even pointing out that the number of fans who respond to questions posed by the developers six months after launch are both self-selecting and the hardest of the hardcore.

We already have this from Yanick Roy, from a few months ago (and after, as it turns out, Hudson's question from November):

[user]
@YanickRRoy Is it possible for ME4 to take place in the same time span as the ME trilogy? I think it would avoid many narratice issues!

Yanick Roy ‏@YanickRRoy
@[user] Possible? Yes. But we'll pick the timeline we think is the best, not necessarily the easiest. We have great writers :-)

[Reever]

ElitePinecone wrote...
For example, in the development process of the third game Bioware concept artist Matt Rhodes drew some images of what the galaxy could look like "in the far, far future" after each ending.

Here's his concept art of Synthesis producing a human/asari/salarian hybrid due to the effects of species mixing and overcoming the limits of habitation using technology:

That's a terribly illogical idea, in my opinion. How should their biology change and allow for hybrids? I know, I know, if Synthesis is possible than anything is, but blah.

And this blog entry looks great, gonna read it right now! Thanks!

Oh, and his Tali looks freaking ugly But then they probably didn't plan for a romance  What we got was too human though.

Modifié par BlueDemonX, 24 juillet 2013 - 12:30 .

[EatChildren]

The cynic in me expects a prequel-esque game, but I really don't think pre-ME3 release plans hold much water at this point. This is before the ending backlash. Before the controversy. Before BW Montreal would have had their direction laid out. Before a lot of things. Though yes, way back when, BioWare's writers may have intended Mass Effect 3 to be an absolute finality, no amount of pre-release concept art and vision can stop change if there is insistence for change.

I also don't think Yanick's tweet, nor the Citadel buzz, implies either release. For the latter, I don't think they wanted to enforce anything except an absolute finality to Shepard's specific story. Even amongst the ending drama, some fans still seemed (and maybe still are) extremely attached to their Shepard, their lore, their story arc, their file import, and so on. These people want Shepard's companions to appear again, references dropped, yadda yadda. BioWare really wanted to push the point that -everything- Shepard is now dust. Everything. Whatever Mass Effect 4 is, prequel/sequel/sidequel/dragonagexmasseffect, it will be a specifically isolated and new narrative for the series, regardless of connection to the lore. All things Shepard are over, and Citadel pushed this point.

[ElitePinecone]

BlueDemonX wrote...

That's a terribly illogical idea, in my opinion. How should their biology change and allow for hybrids? I know, I know, if Synthesis is possible than anything is, but blah.

And this blog entry looks great, gonna read it right now! Thanks!

Oh, and his Tali looks freaking ugly But then they probably didn't plan for a romance  What we got was too human though.

Yeah, I definitely raised an eyebrow at the idea that hybrids were at all possible. I hope that would've been one of the instances where internal feedback led to a change. 

And while I do appreciate the thematic power of having the barriers between different intelligent species disappear gradually due to closer integration, the idea is so wacky that I'm kinda a little perturbed that it got as far as concept art. For all the times we've heard the dev team talk about how much they're aiming for hard sci-fi, ME3 especially has a *worrying* amount of unscientific dialogue or plot points, even if we exclude the space-magic of the last ten minutes. 

It's just not all that encouraging when the default option is to go for things that look cool (or sound cool, for dialogue) without thinking first about the scientific plausibility - particularly for a sci-fi game that holds itself up as being unusually scientific compared to others. I don't think it really should be an excuse that it's a game meant for entertainment purposes, when the team themselves are supposedly aiming for more scientific accuracy. 

EatChildren wrote...
For the latter, I don't think they wanted to enforce anything except an absolute finality to Shepard's specific story. Even amongst the ending drama, some fans still seemed (and maybe still are) extremely attached to their Shepard, their lore, their story arc, their file import, and so on. These people want Shepard's companions to appear again, references dropped, yadda yadda. BioWare really wanted to push the point that -everything- Shepard is now dust. Everything. Whatever Mass Effect 4 is, prequel/sequel/sidequel/dragonagexmasseffect, it will be a specifically isolated and new narrative for the series, regardless of connection to the lore. All things Shepard are over, and Citadel pushed this point.

This is a nice way to put it. The strongest message was that Shepard's story is over.

I agree that there's no super-convincing evidence either way, but my gut says that a clean break with Shepard almost requires a substantial timeline jump, especially if they *do* want to introduce a mostly new cast and get away from the jokesy references and in-jokes and constantly repeating cast of thirty people that Shepard magically happens to run into all over the universe. 

[The Hunter of Legends]

Why are we so deadset on a prequel or midquel?

I really am feeling an alternate universe or sequel more than anything.

[bayofangels]

To me, the fact they stepped back from this stuff out suggests they want to keep the future of the ME universe for whatever's coming next.

[B.Shep]

bayofangels wrote...

To me, the fact they stepped back from this stuff out suggests they want to keep the future of the ME universe for whatever's coming next.

I was thinking the same thing.

[FirstBlood XL]

I'm really hoping it happens AFTER ME3. I don't spend a ton of time thinking about what I'd like to see, as my opinion doesn't matter... BUT....

I'm really hoping for the simple idea that Leviathans are posed to make a come-back, now that Shepard has wiped out the Reapers (or green-fuzzied them, or controlled them).

Maybe it's too ambitious an idea... but your save-file would import and maybe the only thing it reads is your ending choice in ME3. Depending on what you chose, you either have Green-Fuzz-Reapers helping you against Leviathans, Controlled Reapers (Reaper-Shep? )helping you, or No aid at all after destroy. I'm not sure how "refuse" would work, since it leaves the Reaper-conflict unresolved. Maybe it just 'assumes' an ending the devs want it to.

Then your last choices in the original ME trilogy could have some impact, while allowing a new story with new characters. I know that if Reaper-Shep was involved, it would make a lot of the dev's previous comments seem disingenuous, but... well, lets be honest, it wouldn't be the first time.

At the same time, I realize my 'idea' of ME4 is simple and already kind of laid-out... but that's what I like about it. I'm pretty much open to anything other than MMO or FPS. With prequel/midquel being my least desired time-frame. I'd rather move forward.

[felipejiraya]

I'll be pissed beyond belief it the new ME turns out to be something like a "reboot" or a "alternate universe".

[The Hunter of Legends]

felipejiraya wrote...

I'll be pissed beyond belief it the new ME turns out to be something like a "reboot" or a "alternate universe".

Why would that be so bad?

I think it would be awesome to tackle some alternative versions of the ME universe.

[ElitePinecone]

We're getting a bit off-topic, but I think once you start splitting off alternate versions of universes it cheapens the original, or renders its story much less relevant and important than it should be. It turns interesting universes into flimsy comic book narratives where nothing is realistic or consistent, and everything can be changed, rebooted or retconned by a new designer for maximum entertainment or impact. Not that Mass Effect is totally innocent of this already, but nobody is seriously proposing that the next game do something crazy like "what if there's a reboot where Shepard always worked for Cerberus lol lol".

(Someone mentioned the Star Trek reboot earlier but I don't think that holds in this case: those two versions are separated by decades and there are a whole lot of actual reasons why it's impractical to make movies when the actors are all much older.)

In Mass Effect's case, if the next game assumed Shepard never happened (or made some kind of strange alternate universe version) it renders the story and decisions of the first three games irrelevant, and the time they spent designing and refining the IP inconsequential.

But more to the point - why would they ever do that? How would an alternate universe Mass Effect game be marketed or explained to people? It'd completely blow to pieces all the things they've been saying about the series for years - that it's a persistent universe that records and responds to player choices.

If the intent is to have a new protagonist in a new time setting with a new plot doing new things, that *certainly* doesn't require a reboot or alternate universe. There are a huge number of locations, time periods and character types that could work in a new Mass Effect game without needing to totally refresh the IP. It could run before, alongside or (grumble) even after the first trilogy, but telling a completely new story doesn't require the universe to be spun-off or reset.

Do people who want a reboot just want to literally play Shepard again in a new trilogy? I confess I really have no idea why there's such support for an alternate universe game.

[aznjoez]

I don't see any use of a reboot either as you mention ElitePinecone. It is too early to have one. Just like with the new star trek movies. The star trek universe been around for decades and can use some new approaches since it is getting "old", in that case reboots or reinvisionings could work.

From what I understand people just want a reboot because they weren't satisfied with the ending and/or want to continue playing as Shepard. The ending was just 10-20 minutes of a 100+ hour trilogy. (granted there was some other issues people complained about the games throughout them)

I want to continue exploring the current ME universe, with a new hero in the past, present or future. A new hero or a hero you already know like Garrus.

If you want an alternate universe then wait for their new IP.

Modifié par aznjoez, 26 juillet 2013 - 01:10 .

[Nitrocuban]

Well, ME1 had the best story, ME2 had the best storytelling and ME3 had the best gameplay. If Bioware does a reboot with all of the good things plus bigger maps/better graphics on the new console generation that'll be some awesome game to play, wouldn't it?
Maybe it is to early for a reboot but I'd love to see one in say 5 years.

[ElitePinecone]

Fishstick wrote...

I understand if people don't want a reboot because it would be playing Shepard's trilogy all over again, but I am not one of those people who can just ignore the massive flaws in the flow of the story.

Okay, but would you be just as satisfied with a game set in 2170 with a totally new story and characters that never mentioned the Reapers or any of the plotlines that people didn't like in ME2/3? Or one set in, say, 2184 that imported your ME1 save but made a new adventure set in the time when Shepard was lying on an operating table? 

What I find confusing about the desire for a reboot (especially one that stars Shepard, again) is that it amounts to wanting Bioware to remake three games in the same genre with mostly the same story and the same settings, characters and locations - all in order to 'fix' what they see as major issues with the storyline. 

Firstly, I highly, *highly* doubt they'd ever actually do that in a million years, and I find the idea of playing three games with a slightly more coherent story right after we'd just finished playing the same trilogy totally bizarre. Surely they can and should move onto something new? Explore some other part of the ME universe?

I was intensely disappointed with ME3's last ten minutes (and almost all of the Extended Cut and Leviathan), but IMO the absolute best thing they can do now is run as far away from the Reaper storyline as possible and never mention it ever again. Make me forget about the absurd logic of the Catalyst, the weird contradictions in the Reaper portrayals throughout the trilogy, and the revelation that the entire storyline is an insignificant footnote in a million-year-long war between giant cuttlefish and their creations. Focus on the parts of the storyline that actually resonated with people. 

I guess what I mean is: the confusion and sense of dissatisfaction I have towards the endings certainly aren't stronger than my desire to experience something totally new and exciting in the universe, In a perfect world it'd be lovely if someone rewrote the series to actually make sense (though would it even assuage your disappointment, knowing the original story?), but why on earth should they spend six years making a new trilogy when they could do something completely awesome and new in the meantime? 

It's tempting to say "well the universe is screwed anyway so any prequel/midquel will feel hollow", but I'm more than prepared to just forget about the Reaper storyline entirely if the next game tells a compelling story with interesting characters. I'd *much* rather visit new locations, see new characters and give them the chance to have a blank slate with a totally new story - hopefully, it'll be even better this time around. 

[MrDbow]

I am hoping for a reboot of Tweets.

[ElitePinecone]

Retro tweet time!

Sounds like the next Mass Effect officially started the earliest stages of development in June last year:

Ken Thain ‏@KenThain 28 Jun 12
Had a very interesting and exciting kick off meeting to a new project yesterday. BioWare Montreal is going to rock it!

They announced it officially in November, but Ken Thain's tweets from then make it sound like he'd been working on it for a little while.

(That project couldn't have been Omega, because they started working on that right after ME3 launched)

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

To be honest, a reboot or an alternate universe would be the best decision in trying to rebuild the universe from all the horrible missteps that ME3 did to it. However, I do sort of hope its a sequel but it seems highly unlikely. Seems like they are leaning towards midquel or prequel even though most people are asking for something different. =/

[Ajensis]

^ Mr.BlazenGlazen: it's probably better to discuss a reboot in this thread, but just a quick comment on the last part of your post: imagine what it would be like if Bioware went with a sequel mainly because it's "what most people are asking for". Imagine how any of their future games would be like if they followed that line of thought. I'd love a sequel myself, but only if Bioware feels this is where they want to go. Let them tell the stories they want to tell

ElitePinecone wrote...

Retro tweet time!

Sounds like the next Mass Effect officially started the earliest stages of development in June last year:

(...)

Interesting. Aaaand edited the rest of my post, as I realised you were talking about June 2012. Somehow I understood it as the year before think my brain is due a maintenance check.

Modifié par Ajensis, 28 juillet 2013 - 12:00 .

[Lieber]

It's quite curious, really. They started development in June of last year, so they must've had plenty of time to analyze fan feedback. That's also when they released the Extended Cut right?

[Sparbiter]

In regards to that tweet.... Do we know when they started working on me3? like, how long was it from the time they started work, to out first bits of info, to release date in march? I'm trying to get a rough timeline on when we might get our first bit of information.

[Chala]

Sparbiter wrote...

In regards to that tweet.... Do we know when they started working on me3? like, how long was it from the time they started work, to out first bits of info, to release date in march? I'm trying to get a rough timeline on when we might get our first bit of information.

Maybe I'm wrong (This is very old stuff for me), but pre-production started right after the release of ME2.