1056 réponses à ce sujet

[Renew81]

@OP

How is Bioware going to keep everyone happy in Me4?

They wont , its impossible to keep everyone happy there will always be parts that
someone likes and another person does not , but i think bioware has learned alot from the
previous me games and personally iam looking forward to a new mass effect game.

I dont expect that i will like everything in there new game i did not like some things in me 3
as well but looking at all 3 games as a whole iam happy with the games and had fun playing them.

[IllusiveManJr]

Like the above person said, it's impossible.

[Chala]

If they manage to do that, then it would be a perfect game...
And perfection is something that doesn't exist, there's always room for improvement, always.

[remed]

They cannot make everyone happy, but below are my thoughts on how they could try.

I personally would not want just a straight up prequel to the trilogy. Some people have suggested time travel in other forums, and I have been toying with a time travel idea of mine for quite some time since it really has not been done that much in games except for Prince of Persia and Spider-Man Edge of Time. A time travel idea is unique, provides a great story, and can be the new definition of Mass Effect. If I remember correctly, Mass Effect was the term for when humans discovered the mass relays and the technology had a significant effect on human society and advancement. Well, in the next trilogy, time travel can be the new Mass Effect, the new technology that will revolutionalize humanity and the galaxy. Furthermore, the sequel or prequel debate can end. You can do both. We all want to know what happened to the Mass Effect universe after the ME3 ending, but a prequel is easier to make because it is untouched by all the decisions, etc we made. But, a prequel is just not that appealing. Quite frankly, the reason why I am not that interested in a straightforward prequel is the same reason why a lot of people didn't want to play the ME3 DLCs. We all know what happens in the end, so what is the point? Sure, you can play for the story, for the characters. I did. I played all the ME3 DLCs. But in the end, there was still that sad, bitter taste in my mouth that I had a great time...but I know where this is all going...and it just makes it even more painful to play these DLCs when I know that it is all going to have the same sad ending. No matter what I did in the DLCs.

So here is how Bioware can maintain their artistic integrity and not touch the ME3 ending per se while keeping old and new players invested in the new trilogy. Make a sequel and a prequel. And accept that yes, the ending, no matter what you picked...it sucked (my opinion here, but I think based the forums a lot of fans would agree with this). Or could use some improvement. Whatever euphemism you wanna use. The question a lot of fans have if a sequel is made was how to deal with the multiple endings and which canon ending should Bioware choose. Don't have to choose. All of the endings sucked. So Bioware should just give the fans some acknowledgment and insinuate that yes, they know the endings did kinda suck...and guess what, show the fans how much the endings sucked. Because hundreds or thousands of years later, the new ME trilogy universe is post-apocalyptic. It's in ruins. There's a new bad guy of some kind that rose up because of the way Shepard handled the Reapers. Didn't matter how he handled it, Control, Synthesis, Destroy--all of them led to the universe falling into hard times hundreds or thousands of years later and a new galactic threat is about to come and squash it some more. But now somebody invented a time travel device that calculates all the decision trees made in the past and brings out a scenario. And what it calculates is that no matter what Shepard chose...it all ended in a series of events that led to an apocalpytic universe centuries later that is vulnerable to this new threat (and this is a great story device to have the machine summarize the plot of ME1-3, the choices available for Shepard to pick from in the end for the newcomers, and give us a brief explanation of what happened afterwards in the future with each color choice without actually showing what exactly happens). The machine calculates that to prevent this future from happening, Shepard needed to reject all the choices given to him in order for the galaxy to survive and be prepared to face this new galactic threat (totally unrelated to the Reapers but may be affected by their existence, etc). So for Shepard to be able to reject the choices and be victorious against the Reapers, he needs something else farther back in the past to win against the Reapers.

Whatever the case may be, from this plot premise, we can do whatever we want with the new ME trilogy. We can send the protagonist back in time, back to the Rachni Wars, Krogan rebellion, First Contact War, back to the Protheans, back to Leviathan's time when the Reapers first emerged, to some forgotten, unknown, undocumented civilization that rose up against the Reapers, and even back to Shepard's early military career. We can have our new protagonist meet our uploaded Shepard (this can be the only data from the old trilogy that hopefully can somehow be carried over from our current consoles to the next gen consoles--the data and background history and face of our Shepard in ME1-3). The missions in this next trilogy are to acquire something or learn something that would help strengthen the post-apocalyptic galaxy and make it better prepared to face the new foe. Some missions are aimed to help Shepard reject all the color choices, fight the Reapers, and still win (doesn't have to be directly. Could be a missing crucible piece, could be saving a scientist in the Prothean time period that was about to make a revolutionary design that kills the Reapers more efficiently or better yet, deactivates that stupid Star Child) and in this way, prevent a post-apocalyptic world. We can have the protagonist go back and forth in time, where he has to fight something back in his timeline before going back in the past again, etc, and each time he succeeds with something in the past, his post-ME3 world keeps improving. As players when we see that, it feels really rewarding.

So in this way, we are playing a prequel AND a sequel, because we are doing what we're doing back in time in order to affect the universe that came to be AFTER the ME trilogy. And so we are invested because what we are doing will somehow still affect the overall ending of the entire ME game series. Remember how we felt in the Citadel DLC, when we all got sad and teary-eyed despite all the good bonding times we had because we thought, boy, if you only knew the disaster that's coming next and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it? Well, our protagonist can express that to whoever he or she is interacting with in the past. He or she can say, we are celebrating our victories now and enjoying time with friends but I know how it ends, and it's a horrible future. But this time we have hope. That what we are doing in the past will change things. Because we saw how bad things were...but now we can change it. We don't have to accept it. And that gets the fans, both pro and con current ME3 ending invested. It gives Bioware a chance to redeem themselves without retracting the ME3 ending and looking like a pushover to their fans. At the same time they can subtly acknowledge that they jacked the ending up in most fans' eyes so this is their way of getting a second chance without losing their backbone or touching the ME3 game itself ever again.

It would, in my eyes, regain the confidence and trust of some fans who just didn't like the ending and can never get over it. For those fans who were fine with it, they get to have a new story, new characters, new settings and environments both pre and post ME 1-3, and the future of the ME universe is what hangs in the balance and the ending of the past trilogy is somehow still linked to the new trilogy but not in a very direct, obnoxious way that can get annoying for those fans who really were OK with the ending. Because the main plot here is that there's a new galactic threat that we are trying to create a stronger universe in the future for that can fight against this new antagonist (and this new galactic threat, whatever it could be, could also go back in time and pose all kinds of challenges for our protagonist to prevent him or her from succeeding). Some of the missions just happen to involve giving Shepard something in the future that can make him better equipped to reject the color choices. But these missions could be optional, like most of the character missions in ME3 and acquiring war assets. You don't have to do all of them to progress the story. There will be new settings and new characters with only a possible brief cameo of Shepard and a few familiar characters and a few mentions of how Shepard's final color choice, whatever it may be, messed up the universe ultimately or left it ill-prepared to face this new galactic baddie.

And it could go both ways here: people could still think Shepard is a hero, because they don't know what the time travel, scenario calculator machine concluded, or a new twist could be that people in the future, after the events that led to the post-apocalyptic world, think Shepard betrayed them all and failed and is a disgrace. And the protagonist, like all the people around him, hate Shepard for that. But, little by little through traveling in the past, he or she can grow to understand the hard choices that had to be made and how Shepard was misunderstood. So if a Shepard cameo is made within a mission and when they finally meet, it's an enlightening experience for the main protagonist and in some ways also for Shepard because maybe we see him or her as a new soldier, still anxious, without that confidence and nobility that he or she has always displayed since the beginning of Mass Effect. The main protagonist can help him or her build that confidence. Perhaps their meeting can take place in that first battle that is mentioned in Shepard's military history that's different whether he's ruthless, war hero or survivor. That seemed to be the turning point in building Shepard's character. Now we get to live it and help shape it. And not directly through playing Shepard, but by interacting with him or her. That would be neat. But again, this should be short and sweet, like a small nod or tribute to loyal old fans instead of a large segment of the new trilogy.

Another twist could be in the end. The main protagonist, in a tasteful, well-written and well-set-up story, could have the option to save Shepard. Because throughout this time, our goal was to give Shepard the ability to reject the choices and defeat the Reapers, not actually make sure he survives. I would put this scenario after the big main boss fight. Probably the boss trying to prevent the protagonist from getting to Shepard to ensure he is able to make the reject option. And then afterwards, it should all just be cutscenes or little dialogue wheel thingies. Anyways, the time travel, scenario calculator device could imply throughout all this time that if Shepard survives, the galaxy is better off and even more well-prepared for the threat, but if he dies, the galaxy is still able to survive and be prepared for the galactic threat, but not as much. Chances of victory are slimmer and with more lives lost. Allies could die (kinda like the random ME2 squadmate could die or not die type of mechanism--Mordin, I'm looking at you). And so the protagonist has to make a choice of saving Shepard and sacrificing himself or herself, or sacrificing Shepard and concluding that through his or her experiences and all that he or she has learned from Shepard, he or she has become the "new" Shepard and this is what the time travel device thingy hasn't calculated: with him or her doing all the missions, the next trilogy's main protagonist is the asset that's needed to help win against this new galactic foe. And Shepard and his or her contributions after the Reaper war if he or she did survive is not needed. In other words, if the main protagonist did all the missions well and got all the objectives, etc, he or she is equal in asset value to Shepard, and so with the protagonist alive after doing all the missions well or completing certain sidequests, the chances of allies surviving and winning is the same as when Shepard is saved. So that leaves the players with a tough and bittersweet choice. Do you love Shepard from the old trilogy that much to save him or her and have him or her reunite with his crew and LI (This should seriously be an ending cutscene if the main protagonist chooses Shepard) but at the expense of the new protagonist you have been playing, or did the new ME protagonist win you over and you want him or her to survive and reunite with his or her squadmates and LI, in the process sacrificing Shepard, the person who starred in the trilogy whose ending you were so mad about? It's a great, dramatic twist, and it should not be a ploy or a gimmick but a well written, well thought-out, respectful to fans plot device that everyone can appreciate as they feel torn with the decision they have to make. Either way, they should feel bittersweet satisfaction with whatever they choose in the end. Not anger. And the choices should not be color coded this time.

Modifié par remed, 08 avril 2013 - 05:53 .

[k.lalh]

^From just scanning that wall of text, I liked the stuff I saw and the sentiment at the end.

A TL;DR summary would be nice though.

[Venom man4]

Can't simply keep the entire fan base happy. As soon as the game is announced to its release and then after, people will be complaining about something.

[Diurdi]

Venom man4 wrote...

Can't simply keep the entire fan base happy. As soon as the game is announced to its release and then after, people will be complaining about something.

I think a better question is how Bioware is going to avoid the same SNAFU they had with ME3.

I doubt they want another game with a metacritic rating of 4.5

[Sussugamon]

Might that be they'll make a prequel, perhaps recounting wars like the Rachni Wars, the First Contact War and something else. During the process of gameplay, you'd get some choices to follow and change this and that. Just extending a bit this idea, they'll make some of these points have small impacts on a replay over the Trilogy, by making a small patch for all those three games, and changing things in codex, stuff like that, so as not to be so quite disconnected.

If they make a sequel, I'm afraid it won't do to have the same appealing atmosphere as the Trilogy. It's just as good as it is.

[Bizinha]

I think that if ME4 begin in priority:earth, give a canon (and good ) ending, most of players would be satisfied.

[liggy002]

Diurdi wrote...

Venom man4 wrote...

Can't simply keep the entire fan base happy. As soon as the game is announced to its release and then after, people will be complaining about something.

I think a better question is how Bioware is going to avoid the same SNAFU they had with ME3.

I doubt they want another game with a metacritic rating of 4.5

The damage has already been done.  I see that EA received the golden poo award yet again.  They didn't fix the ME3 ending so now they will suffer the consequences.

[Iucounou]

They won't keep everyone happy, and they know it. So they won't really try. They'll produce something for ME4 that plays to the largest demographic they can find and then add in some "consolation" bits to try and keep the rest happy.

Unfortunately, I suspect the "large" demographic they will play to will be the FPS brigade. Expect even more dumbing-down of actual gameplay and the slow erosion of any role-playing potential in favour of instant gratification micro-transactions and pew-pew action and QTE.

I hope I'm wrong. I really do.

[anillee]

Iucounou wrote...

They won't keep everyone happy, and they know it. So they won't really try. They'll produce something for ME4 that plays to the largest demographic they can find and then add in some "consolation" bits to try and keep the rest happy.

Unfortunately, I suspect the "large" demographic they will play to will be the FPS brigade. Expect even more dumbing-down of actual gameplay and the slow erosion of any role-playing potential in favour of instant gratification micro-transactions and pew-pew action and QTE.

I hope I'm wrong. I really do.

I hope you are wrong too, but In the event you aren't, I'll probably start looking over at CD Projeckt.

[zeypher]

Iucounou wrote...

They won't keep everyone happy, and they know it. So they won't really try. They'll produce something for ME4 that plays to the largest demographic they can find and then add in some "consolation" bits to try and keep the rest happy.

Unfortunately, I suspect the "large" demographic they will play to will be the FPS brigade. Expect even more dumbing-down of actual gameplay and the slow erosion of any role-playing potential in favour of instant gratification micro-transactions and pew-pew action and QTE.

I hope I'm wrong. I really do.

I honestly would not be suprised if this happened.

[Alien Number Six]

Chris Priestly wrote...

To call the next game Mass Effect 4 or ME4 is doing it a disservice and seems to cause a lot of confusion here. We have already said that the Commander Shepard trilogy is over and that the next game will not feature him/her. That is the only detail you have on the game. I see people saying "well, they'll have to pick a canon ending". No, because the game does not have to come after. Or before. Or off to the side. Or with characters you know. Or yaddayaddayadda. Wherever, whenever, whoever, etc will all be revealed years down the road when we actually start talking about it.

I do not call the game ME4 when I talk about it ever, bucause that makes people think of it more as "what happens after Mass Effect 3" rather than "what game happens next set in the Mass Effect Universe", which is far more accurate at this point. Obviously fans are going to speculate content, character and story until we actually reveal details in the years or months to come as you have almost no actual details, just don't get bogged down in "well how are they going to continue ME3...".

          If they are not going to do a sequel the Mass Effect universe is as dead as Babylon 5's. They also tried spinoffs and did a prequil movie but it didn't matter. BioWare has killed the golden goose and the next game will fail. Other young writers should take notice. NEVER write yourself into a corner. 

:alien::alien::alien:

[Twisted Path]

My prediction: next game is going to be a straight forward third person shooter called "Mass Effect: Specter Ops." There will be a short single player campaign but the game will focus on multiplayer. Maybe the dialogue wheel will pop up once or twice and give you a choice for old times sake but probably not. Since the game won't have much of a plot to speak of the ending of ME3 won't matter, thus keeping everyone happy.

They really wanted to make a prequel called "Mass Effect: First Contact" but everyone saying that they didn't want a prequel made them back off of that idea.

Modifié par Twisted Path, 20 avril 2013 - 07:39 .

[SyK18]

It can't keep everyone happy. It's impossible. I don't expect it to. It is a business and the whole point is to make profit and reduce costs. It could care less who is "happy" with its products. It is just looking for people who will settle and throw money at the lowest possible quality it can deliver.

I know I was unhappy with the lazy ending and the huge focus on banging your squad mates in ME3 but others were happy with it and wanted more of it. No matter what Bioware comes out with next there is still going to be a group of people who are going to hate it or certain aspects of it. And guess what? Bioware could care less about those people as long as there are others willing to deal with unfinished products.

[Killdren88]

I'm putting all of my chips on Reboot. If its not a sequel nor a prequel it has to be a reboot. To me anyway it seems like the best route to go. They redo the story. They do it without the endings that destroy and further exploration into the universe without making two of three groups pissed.

[Saito404]

iakus wrote...

Jadebaby wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

"... and then Shepard woke up in bed and it had all been a dream....."

Ok, there is NO way we would do that becuase it is among the cheesiest McGuffin around, but it is an example of what can be done. I can't say the more "real" possibilities because I may accidentally mention what may really happen. I'm just saying that people who think it MUST be X or XY are really limiting their vision.

Wait, worse then the whole thing being a story told by a creepy Grandfather to his grandchild?

I'd prefer Shepard wake up in bed tbh.

I can honestly say, I agree.

WHo would have thought thE "Dallas method" could be something that would improve Mass Effect?

That's my canon ending for ME "trilogy".  Seriously. After shooting the kid / tube Shepard wakes up in Captain's cabin of SR1 and says "God, that was dumbest dream I ever had". MEHEM is great, but I still prefer "Shepard wakes up" ending.

[S.A.K]

Simple. They can't. Someone will always b*tch about everything.

[Escape700]

If they wanna make a mass effect game post- reaper cycle, the only ending that would make sense would be the destroy one. Shepard controlling the reapers can end any threat and synthesis creating a peaceful interconnected community is boring. They should just retcon with the indoctrination theory as it would solve the problem while making the mass effect ending 10X better.

[spockjedi]

Killdren88 wrote...

I'm putting all of my chips on Reboot. If its not a sequel nor a prequel it has to be a reboot. To me anyway it seems like the best route to go. They redo the story. They do it without the endings that destroy and further exploration into the universe without making two of three groups pissed.

This. But they should give us a time, leaving the franchise untouched at least for 5 years. And the best to start the new trilogy is with a remake of ME1. Something like "Mass Effect Anniversary".

[Torrential]

The plots are likely to be either:

1, The first reaper Cycle, millions/billions of years before any of this.
2, During the war, in the years that the alliance were missed out, there is a huge gap during ME2 that can be filled up with content.

Prequels will be pointless. - I will not buy a prequel, unless it gets great reviews for its RPG elements. Dramatic impact in the story will be much harder to achieve, knowing the ending, and what follows. A Shepherd Prequel however I would buy, but as Shepherd is out that won't happen *shrug*. There was an interesting prequel on youtube called red sand staring the VO of Shepherd and Ashley.
www.youtube.com/watch

Another easy possibility is - Anything thousands of years after can just ignore the ending anyway. I know people even the devs seem fixated on the mere possibility of a character being dead, but well, ME 3 was made after ME 2 and death was a possibility there. So there is a possibility something is dead, but go to a 1000 years after the event and you have a blank playground anyway. Liara and Wrex/Grunt might be alive but that is about it.

In this case of setting ME 4 eventually after ME3 - I hope for 50 - 100 years, but if it's set after it'll be more like a thousand. While I could write plausible and engaging story arcs to make the endings fit 100 years, my confidence in the average writer isn't that high.

Modifié par Torrential, 21 avril 2013 - 09:41 .