Since this is apparently an unfiltered "ideas" thread: here's my contribution. Sort of like a box art plot summary below followed by nitpicky details. First things first though, sequel vs. prequel
I am definately on the side of after. Sure, prequels can be good (looking at you deus ex: HR), but they do not advance the story of the original title. And Mass Effect 3, even with the EC, still leaves us with questions that we, as the audience trying to enjoy the
game, need to have answered. It simply dosen't help to do a prequel
for Mass Effect when the series itself is built on making choices and facing the consequences, however well the writing and
gameplay actually do this (now looking at you, collector base). And even if it does become its own trilogy with branching storylines made possible by player choice, it is simply narratively incapable of explaining the ending
for ME3 since that would essientially be having one story predict the ending of another. Which is just wrong
for any self-respecting writer to do. Isn't it wrong, Bioware? BIOWARE?
Even if a
game does a terrible job of connecting consequence to action, and assigning significance to that action, there is still closure, which is really what the crew on the EC should have been focused more on than clarity of the starkid's idiocy. Seriously, I will hold the narrative value of the fustercluck of story elements that bioware arbitraily assigned points to in the GAW system to be higher over any prequel that leaves me knowing how bad it will be
for anyone in this fictional universe regardless of the prequel's value as a
game and a story on its own merits. In providing closure
for the main series going
forward, it ends whatever threads of doubt
your audience will have and at the very least allows them to say "well that was not well done"
for whatever narrative mistakes were made instead of "they broke the narrative and the genre and the characters and the coherence and..."
for a still unchanged and nonsensical resolution.
There are many examples of prequels doing well in all mediums, but in consideration of the ending that ME3 currently provides us, the only time that it will be actually okay to do a prequel is when the main storyline has actually been wrapped up, but lingering questions remain that are related to but not a driving
force of the main series. Star Wars, however you may think of George Lucas and the prequels, is actually one of the best and clearest examples of doing this, as Return of the Jedi ended the first trilogy in a way that the writers of mass effect are currently having wet dreams of while leaving a plot point that would become THE reason
for the prequels: Luke Skywalker's mother. Luke and his father, Vader, fought and killed the emperor. The rebellion blew up the second death star, destroying the last tool the empire could use to terrify the galaxy and killing their leadership in one fell swoop. Rebellion: 1, Empire: 0. But outside of the ending, there were still questions to be asked. Namely, who was luke's mother? That question alone was problably enough
for george lucas to seriously consider prequels which then...happened.
Okay, so...
Mass Effect 4 20 years (or so) after the Reaper War, the Galaxy is slowly but surely rebuilding itself to its
former glory. But this is not being done without hurdles in the way. Colonies, some saved by their respective galatic governments while others were left to fend
for themselves in the face of reaper attacks on more "important" targets, have began to splinter away from their homeworlds. In addition, the firing of the reaper-killing superweapon, the crucible, has left the galaxy littered with the corpses of a dead race filled with dormant technology capable of advancing all civilized life, or ending it. It is time to decide how you will save the galaxy, and what exactly you will save...
Details:
So, yeah...the ending to ME3. My idea? Retcon the crucible firing to only target the reapers a la a perfect destroy ending, and focus whatever mysterious elements the crucible had in me3 into how it bounced a reaper killing laser beam around the galaxy. Seriously, did the SCALE of that event occuring in such a short TIME cross anyone's mind?
Factions/Species/Governments
Have the geth go into isolation (if they're not dead), because while mind control of individuals is scary in its own right (indoctrination, anyone?) ,the geth saw this happen to their ENTIRE species. That is more than enough cause
for a species wide moment of reflection, and the geth need to process and analyse that and the state of their existance.
Have the krogan start warring, with Wrex trying to calm them down or Wreav encouraging them to war. The reasons why can be simple enough if you let them be. Population expansion from the genophage cure, or resentment
for helping to save the galaxy and still not getting a cure
for a species killing condition. What I would like to see (and this is the part where I start telling
Casey Hudson how to design his
game right down to the missions
) is a "two mission" structure based upon having either wrex or wreav alive. At a certain point, the protagonist goes to tuchanka, and based upon whether Shepard kept Wrex alive or met Wreav on the throne instead, gets two different missions to play through. If Wrex is alive, you protect him from an assasination attempt. If Wreav is on the throne, you assasinate him instead. Of course, the story can be written quite easily to avoid that kind of development (just kill off wrex or wreav anyway as soon as they're ever introduced, and assume whatever you need to assume
for the plot), but I've never seen a
game that changed the in-
game objectives based on past decisions. Do it, Bioware. Make some heads turn. And Tuchanka seems to be a good place
for you guys to show off what ME is capable of anyway.
The quarians, regardless of whether their fleet was destroyed or not, have resettled on Rannoch. The difference here being how many quarians landed on Rannoch. If the flotilla was saved, then all is good and well, basically. If the flotilla was destroyed, only some quarian civilian ships landed on Rannoch, and the quarians now find themselves in the same boat as the drell.
As
for the apparent lowering of the geth and the quarians down the importance ladder, I would like to say this: I do not want to kill machines anymore (cause I'm a dirty marxist hippie who hates amurica). I want to kill people with compelling grudges, who make me not only hate them
for devaluing my character and what I stand
for, but who also can make me question why I kill them in the first place with a sympathetic but mostly well-written backstory. Sound a little too idealistic
for mass effect? It likely is, but this is what I would like to see, not what will happen.
Anyway, as
for everyone else in the galaxy? Anything goes, really. The turian hierachry can be in the middle of a civil war. The alliance could be the dominant military
force in the galaxy. The citadel could not be the seat of the council anymore. Or none of that couid be, and it could be something else entirely. The examples above deal more with closing loops that fell under the player's influence in the first 3
games than creating new ones in whatever new series, and I'm more concerned with how bioware does that than explain to us how the Hanar are now trying to compete with the salarian union
for uplifting warlike species without regard
for the consequences by giving the yahg
jetpacks.
Modifié par Ombot, 02 décembre 2012 - 12:19 .
Retour en haut
