79 réponses à ce sujet

[OMEGAlomaniac]

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

If it happens Bioware would most likely have to canonize an overall outcome (not just Red, Blue or Green, but the current state of the Krogan, the Quarians, the Rachni, the Geth etc..). This removes ALL illusions of choice we had throughout the Trilogy, and makes choosing an ending completely arbitarty (not that any of what happened at the end was great). And looking at the "default" choices they would have you import in to ME3 if you had not played the original games, the galaxy would not be in a state to write home about. Of course, it's "possible" that the writers will be able to impliment all of these possible outcomes (and this is the only way I would ever accept a sequel), but it's unlikely.. especially if they follow through on the promise that ME3 was the end of Shepards story. And no, simply setting it far in the future does not fix these issues, you still have to add/remove entire races, the existence of Reapers and whether or not every form of life in the galaxy is biosynthetic.

Going back, or running at a similar time still has a lot of possibilities I feel many are not even considering. And no, we don't "already know the ending", because we don't have to include any reference to Shepard, his crew, or the Reapers at all. Now I know that for some reason people will have switched off here immediately, because for some reason a lot of people think Mass Effect can't exist without Shepard. Well she won't be appearing at all in a "sequel" anyway, so I don't see the problem. There are so many options for a main character it's crazy: a trader, pirate, pioneer, space detective, explorer, mercenary.... the list goes on. And not to mention, none of these characters have to be human either. It could be an espionage game focused around the First Contact War, an exploration game set around new colonies after peace settled, an elcor living tank employed by the Blue Suns,  or could even take place before Humanity became part of the galactic community at all, and focus around the Rachni Wars, or the forming of the council. Not every story told in the universe has to have us saving the galaxy from some sort of huge threat, a more focused, refined and smaller scale story could pull the series along amazingly well. All of these can still have the character development, descision making, exploration and storytelling that made us love Mass Effect in the first place, without making Bioware force a canon ending on us, and without making every single one of our descisions (including the endings) trivial.

[H-Hammer]

The problem with a sequel is that the endings make one difficult. A prequel on the other hand, especially one of the first contact war would be interesting.

[spirosz]

Choices, in Mass Effect, LOL.

Even though I won't pick up anything ME-related, I hope they consider not doing a trilogy again, or save import feature, etc. Just canon something to make it easier on themselves because they had enough problems with the quality of choices presented throughout all three games.

[Hey]

True. If synthesis was canon i may seek an in game suicide option... If they can accomodate all the ending choices from 3 tho it may not be ok.

[Dubozz]

We asked for satisfying endings that make sense, got retarded ones. Just want to forget about them, destroy for canon and a new story in future. And yeah prequels sucks.

[Malanek]

OMEGAlomaniac wrote...

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

If it happens Bioware would most likely have to canonize an overall outcome (not just Red, Blue or Green, but the current state of the Krogan, the Quarians, the Rachni, the Geth etc..). This removes ALL illusions of choice we had throughout the Trilogy, and makes choosing an ending completely arbitarty (not that any of what happened at the end was great).  

I strongly disagree with this. You would get to see firsthand from ME4 what happens in one possible future. If you picked synthesis and they pick Destroy as the basis for ME4, you get to say "this is what my Shepard avoided". You will be playing a different character, you should have no control over a decision some else, Biowares Shepard, made.

[KingZayd]

I don't see them being able to pull off a sequel without invalidating the ending of ME3.
THAT is why I want a sequel.

[Vic-TIM of Circumstance]

OMEGAlomaniac wrote...

Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

This is why it should be a sequel.  If it were a prequel, There would be absolutely NO variance in how your choices would impact the galaxy.  Everything would be set in stone.  You say continuing the game would ruin the value of player choice, but how would a prequel be ANY better? You would say that, because they are continuing the game, they would be lessening the impact of any decision previously made, but you do not realize that in order to even MAKE a prequel, they would have to completely neuter the impact of ALL decisions in the game.

[silentassassin264]

Because I want to see more Mass Effect but I want it redeemed from the craptastic way in ended. A prequel is like after playing on the train tracks happily and getting squished, you get a second chance at life and move further down the train tracks so you will get squished again, just later.

[TNT1991]

Unless Bioware/ME Team can pull it off -extremely- well, I don't see how a prequel is any better, imo. There will still be the reaper threat/war coming, that will always be in the back of my mind while playing it.

Plus, I believe in moving forward with any series, for better and worse.

[Dav3VsTh3World]

[quote]OMEGAlomaniac wrote...

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?[/quote]

Because there is still a wide variety of paths untapped in the Mass Effect Universe such as going beyond the Citadel Relay or being the first to travel through dormant Relays

[quote] If it happens Bioware would most likely have to canonize an overall outcome (not just Red, Blue or Green, but the current state of the Krogan, the Quarians, the Rachni, the Geth etc..).[/quote]
No they don't They have proven with Star Wars The Old Republic that they are more than capable of juggling different storylines, The R/B/G options actually work in ME4's favor as it would allow for a bare minimum of 3 different storylines not counting the choices made in the current game.

There are many possibilites as to how to make it possible such as introducing a new universal threat for all storylines and have unique stages, There are many games in the past that have had different storylines such as Seiken Densetsu 3 on the SNES, The Resident Evil remake on the Gamecube had 2 different stories each with mulitple endings.

As for the species all the programmers would need to do is to turn on orr off if they appear in the game, either as Merchants or NPC's

Bioware is more than able to accomidate that, if they couldn't they wouldn't have made the differnt choiced ending to begin with.

[quote]This removes ALL illusions of choice we had throughout the Trilogy, and makes choosing an ending completely arbitarty (not that any of what happened at the end was great). And looking at the "default" choices they would have you import in to ME3 if you had not played the original games, [/quote]

Question OP were you around on the BSN just shortly after ME2 was announced? there were fans then saying that Bioware would have to canonise the choices and look what happened there

[quote] Of course, it's "possible" that the writers will be able to impliment all of these possible outcomes (and this is the only way I would ever accept a sequel), but it's unlikely..((((No its not, your just saying its too hard,)))) especially if they follow through on the promise that ME3 was the end of Shepards story. And no, simply setting, it far in the future does not fix these issues, you still have to add/remove entire races, the existence of Reapers and whether or not every form of life in the galaxy is biosynthetic. [/quote] They did indeed state that ME3 was the end of Shepards story but they also stated that ME3 would not be the last Mass Effect, and as I stated, programming to turn races on or off is rather easy, don't forget that Mass Effect 3 was able to compensate its story for deceased squadmates.

[quote]Going back, or running at a similar time still has a lot of possibilities I feel many are not even considering. And no, we don't "already know the ending", because we don't have to include any reference to Shepard, his crew, or the Reapers at all. Now I know that for some reason people will have switched off here immediately, because for some reason a lot of people think Mass Effect can't exist without Shepard.[/quote]
Paragon Lost and Infiltrator says hi
[quote] Well she won't be appearing at all in a "sequel" anyway, so I don't see the problem. There are so many options for a main character it's crazy: a trader, pirate, pioneer, space detective, explorer, mercenary.... the list goes on. And not to mention, none of these characters have to be human either.[/quote]
I agree, there are many options available rather than just having the character be a space marine spectre to save the galaxy, I especially like the idea of the new hero being a pilot.

[quote]It could be an espionage game focused around the First Contact War,[/quote]
The problem with the First Contact War is that the conflit was short, plus you wouldn't be able to make choices since the story is already known

[quote]an exploration game set around new colonies after peace settled, [/quote]
This would probably work better as an iPhone, XBLA or PSN game rather than a retail game

[quote]an elcor living tank employed by the Blue Suns,  [/quote]
Elcor's are slow they wouldn't be that fun to move around

[quote]or could even take place before Humanity became part of the galactic community at all, and focus around the Rachni Wars, or the forming of the council. [/quote]

I'll give you credit the Racini wars could actually work but again the same biggest issue arrises as lack of freedom of choice, another issue is that you'd want to be careful to not have it too similar to Starship Troopers

[quote]Not every story told in the universe has to have us saving the galaxy from some sort of huge threat, a more focused, refined and smaller scale story could pull the series along amazingly well. All of these can still have the character development, descision making, exploration and storytelling that made us love Mass Effect in the first place, without making Bioware force a canon ending on us, and without making every single one of our descisions (including the endings) trivial.
[/quote]

I made a thread earlier today suggesting that if a prequel does happen its best to mark it for a handheld console release to allow the main studios enough time to take into account all the choices for ME3, plus get use to programming on the new consoles since by the time its released the Xbox 720 and PS4 will be released, If there was a handheld title I would suggest it would be that of your suggestion of the Racini Wars
http://social.biowar.../index/15000235

Modifié par Dav3VsTh3World, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:09 .

[Iakus]

If a sequel is made, Bioware should ignore all the endings.  "We won.  Reapers lost.  End of story"  Bury the endings and never speak of them again.  That's one choice that really shouldn't matter.  No good would come of it.

[futurepixels]

Malanek999 wrote...

OMEGAlomaniac wrote...

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

If it happens Bioware would most likely have to canonize an overall outcome (not just Red, Blue or Green, but the current state of the Krogan, the Quarians, the Rachni, the Geth etc..). This removes ALL illusions of choice we had throughout the Trilogy, and makes choosing an ending completely arbitarty (not that any of what happened at the end was great).  

I strongly disagree with this. You would get to see firsthand from ME4 what happens in one possible future. If you picked synthesis and they pick Destroy as the basis for ME4, you get to say "this is what my Shepard avoided". You will be playing a different character, you should have no control over a decision some else, Biowares Shepard, made.

I agree with this.  At least with a sequel we get to see what happens after ME3.  It may not be the galaxy we hoped to make with our decisions, but Bioware has made it pretty clear that they don't want us to make that many real decisions... And let's face it, they can't really handle it.

[Hendrik.III]

KingZayd wrote...

I don't see them being able to pull off a sequel without invalidating the ending of ME3.
THAT is why I want a sequel.

I like the way you think, hehe.

It has to be a sequel imo, a prequel would be uninteresting knowing what's going to happen.

[corporal doody]

OP...i love your "question" and think you should be a moderator for Fox News

Modifié par corporal doody, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:55 .

[BioWareM0d13]

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

That is a large part of why I woudn't want to see a prequel.

The problem with a prequel is that it ships with a canon outcome that anyone who isn't new to the series is already aware of. Since a canon chain of events has already been established in the codex, a prequel setting would limit a player's ability to impact the game world far more than a sequel ever would.

Prequels are also unappealing in that they leave no room for the writers to pull off twists or suprises, or to keep the players in suspense. They'd also suffer from being set in a smaller universe where some factions are either completely divorced from the main plot, or haven't even made first contact yet.

For those reasons I think it makes for more sense to move the timeline forward. A sequel is the way to go.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 21 novembre 2012 - 07:20 .

[Vic-TIM of Circumstance]

Han Shot First wrote...

Genuine curiosity: What makes you think this would be a good idea? Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

That is a large part of why I woudn't want to see a prequel.

The problem with a prequel is that it ships with a canon outcome that anyone who isn't new to the series is already aware of. Since a canon chain of events has already been established in the codex, a prequel setting would limit a player's ability to impact the game world far more than a sequel ever would.

Prequels are also unappealing in that they leave no room for the writers to pull off twists or suprises, or to keep the players in suspense. They'd also suffer from being set in a smaller universe where some factions are either completely divorced from the main plot, or haven't even made first contact yet.

For those reasons I think it makes for more sense to move the timeline forward. A sequel is the way to go.

ahh. I had said something similar somewhere above, but you worded it much more eloquently than I did.  I agree with you 100%

[Liec]

OMEGAlomaniac wrote...
Do you even value the fact that player choice is a huge part of why this series is so (mostly) amazing?

I could ask this same question to the people who prefer a prequel. If you value choice so much, why don't you want the story to go forward and see the consequences of those choices? You basically want them to ignore the decisions by setting the game before they were made. 

Beside, BW can't just keep making prequel after prequel forever like some kind of Merlin franchise. There will have to be something set after the Reapers eventually or things will just go stale :/

Modifié par Liec, 21 novembre 2012 - 07:27 .

[Nightwriter]

The ME team has demonstrated it kind of sucks at continuity. Whether that's due to a flaw in their approach or just immovable development/marketing limitations, the conclusion is the same: I'm safer if they don't attempt any ME3 to ME4 continuity, or else, that it's there but very light. I'm also probably safer if they stop doing trilogy pieces and stick to self-contained games.

[SNascimento]

Just set it very far in the future.

[corporal doody]

SNascimento wrote...

Just set it very far in the future.

couple centuries would work.

long enough for things to be more or less rebuilt....but not long enough to hide all the scars.

Modifié par corporal doody, 21 novembre 2012 - 07:34 .

[Vic-TIM of Circumstance]

SNascimento wrote...

Just set it very far in the future.

In this case, I think it would be smarter to set it closer to the end of the Reaper war.  If it were set too far in the future, the world that many have grown attached to may become even more unfamiliar and it may turn off some fans. 

If it were set closer to the Reaper war, it could take place in the relay rebuild period.  The isolation caused by not having relays could insulate the new setting from the majority of major decisions from the first trilogy while also creating an interesting new setting for the next game to take place in

[Mcfly616]

The answer is quite simple. Don't canonize an ME3 ending.....and don't make a sequal to it unless the sequal accounts for the final choice (I know, such a thing seems near impossible. )But, it just wouldn't feel right if it didn't account for the most influential decision in galactic history.

And implementing that one decision into the next game would be groundbreaking for all of gaming. 3 separate yet similar, but inherently different settings. As well as all the different references to "The Shepard" that would result..... It has the potential to be mind-blowing. Even though it seems difficult.

[SNascimento]

Not really what I was thinking. I meant far, like, 100.000 years in the future far.
.
Of course, with this comes the question of what galaxy will be there. We still want Mass Effect, we want things that are familiar to us. So Bioware would have to find a balance between the new and the old.
.
I support this because I think it can work like a reboot.

[corporal doody]

SNascimento wrote...

Not really what I was thinking. I meant far, like, 100.000 years in the future far.
.
Of course, with this comes the question of what galaxy will be there. We still want Mass Effect, we want things that are familiar to us. So Bioware would have to find a balance between the new and the old.
.
I support this because I think it can work like a reboot.

too far....too far..

even with refuse....50k would be reasonable...but even that is too far.

anywhere from 200-1000 years makes sense to me.