1056 réponses à ce sujet

[Spartan3222]

L_B_123 wrote...

I can imagine what they'd do if synthesis is canon, I mean would there be conflict any more? The species all have interlinking consensus to an extant. I struggle to see what a sequel could possibly do or got to. Add to that you'd never get another Shepard like character as all minds have been significantly changed so less free will.

Sysn doesn't change the mind only the body so war and non-peace would still exist also synthetics would just be as susptible to war as organics

[Rotward]

I didn't read this 35 page thread because it's 35 pages, but I'll respond to the title! They won't. No matter what they do, even if the me3 endings had been perfect, someone will be upset. So they'll just pick a story the writers will enjoy developing, and hope the players enjoy it too.

[Admaeyn]

It's impossible to make everyone happy, there will always be someone who doesn't like.I'm gonna play it and i'm pretty sure I will love the game, so far I have loved all the mass effect games. I will admit though the ME3 ending was a bit sour, but overall i loved the game.

[Spartan3222]

Well yeah only 100% perfection will make happiness which is impossible but are argument is the past 3 to 4 pages

[Vicious]

Rotward wrote...

I didn't read this 35 page thread because it's 35 pages, but I'll respond to the title! They won't. No matter what they do, even if the me3 endings had been perfect, someone will be upset. So they'll just pick a story the writers will enjoy developing, and hope the players enjoy it too.

this is it.

canonize me

[Spartan3222]

It takes to long for someone to respond to anythng

[DQX]

Thread got long so I'll say it again even if someone else already did: 

Modifié par DQX, 30 novembre 2013 - 10:43 .

[Gkonone]

The saying goes ' never change a winning team', yet they did. Killing Shepard off was the worst idea they could ever come up with. A protagonist and crew that are hugely popular won't be making a return because well, no idea.

[noobcannon]

if you chose synthesis or control, shepard is the antagonist. if you chose destroy shepard is an ally. if you chose refuse you don't get to import just like if you died at the end of me2.

[Hurbster]

Oh, just like JC Denton in (spits) Deus Ex:Invisible War.

[Spartan3222]

It could be that the new guy is a shy underdog hero (no matter what) who must prove himself to become a spectre and kill something before anyone finds out but fails to fully stop this enemy before it gets severe unlike Shepard who most people already saw as a hero.

[Jobele]

Good Lord, I am laughing my butt off at them asking what we wantedand trust me that is a lot of laughing! How in the world do you think they will be able to create a prequal or sequal that is going to go over with the Mass Effect fans? Remember this is the same bunch who was talking down to the people who had complained about the ending by calling them spoiled and childish. When the fans arose and EA/Bioware didn't realize they had pulled the proverbial Tiger's tail so they had Dr. Ray Muyzka say oops, were sorry but since this is art tough tittys because our guys did such a wonderful job of creating a story. This also the same group who created a game that they promised would have sooooo many different final endings and there were only three and when this came out they added a fourth where you could walk away. Seriously? Thanks for all those promised endings. How do you think if they can screw up the ending as badly as they did that they will be able to do a story that will have a consistant flow from episode a to z with out Mass Mutinies?

[DarthSliver]

Jobele wrote...

Good Lord, I am laughing my butt off at them asking what we wantedand trust me that is a lot of laughing! How in the world do you think they will be able to create a prequal or sequal that is going to go over with the Mass Effect fans? Remember this is the same bunch who was talking down to the people who had complained about the ending by calling them spoiled and childish. When the fans arose and EA/Bioware didn't realize they had pulled the proverbial Tiger's tail so they had Dr. Ray Muyzka say oops, were sorry but since this is art tough tittys because our guys did such a wonderful job of creating a story. This also the same group who created a game that they promised would have sooooo many different final endings and there were only three and when this came out they added a fourth where you could walk away. Seriously? Thanks for all those promised endings. How do you think if they can screw up the ending as badly as they did that they will be able to do a story that will have a consistant flow from episode a to z with out Mass Mutinies?

 
You call the 3 endings different?

I think either a majorly messed up galaxy due to the crucible not doing those choices but doing what it was meant to do kill the Reapers but leaving the galaxy without a means to travel it. Basically destroying the Reapers sends the Galaxy into a dark age with the species having to find a new way to remake the Mass Relays/ space travel. 
But it would be easier for Bioware reset the Mass Effect world keeping the Races we actually liked only and making new Races to add. 

[durasteel]

It's funny, really. You have all these Priestley quotes about how it might be before, after, to the side, or something else... hilarious.

ME3 was, or at least should have been, an object lesson in what happens when a company releases a product that doesn't provide its loyal return customers with what they want. We have every reason to suspect that this lesson was learned, since they started asking--in clear and unequivocal terms--what the customers wanted for the next installment.

The responses were overwhelmingly in favor of a sequel. I can't imagine that the EA guys in ties would give our buddies in Edmonton much of a choice, really.

[Fanuilos]

durasteel wrote...

It's funny, really. You have all these Priestley quotes about how it might be before, after, to the side, or something else... hilarious.

ME3 was, or at least should have been, an object lesson in what happens when a company releases a product that doesn't provide its loyal return customers with what they want. We have every reason to suspect that this lesson was learned, since they started asking--in clear and unequivocal terms--what the customers wanted for the next installment.

The responses were overwhelmingly in favor of a sequel. I can't imagine that the EA guys in ties would give our buddies in Edmonton much of a choice, really.

To be fair Chris cannot really confirm anything without endangering his career.  I want a straight answer as much as any of you, but it will happen when the game is good and ready.  I think that going with a sequel is a good choice even if it does open multiple cans of worms.  I don't like the idea of a prequel, AU, or a game that takes place during the trilogies events.  Those options feel impersonal to me. 

I'm sure I'm not the only one, but for me Shepard and his crew ARE Mass Effect. The series doesn't work without them IMO, and I don't know how Bioware will win me over in the next game.  They have their work cut out for them, here's hoping they pull it off.

Modifié par Fanuilos, 18 décembre 2013 - 05:37 .

[durasteel]

I think you're under-appreciating the potential of a sequel as a stomping ground for a new protagonist with a new ship and crew. The Reaper War did a lot of damage, and even if the relays are back online, and the Citadel is good-as-new, and the commercial center on Illum is all shiney, there are still plenty of rough edges left around the galaxy that provide opportunities for a gentle-being of fortune to turn a profit, both legitimate and nefarious.

[Iakus]

durasteel wrote...

It's funny, really. You have all these Priestley quotes about how it might be before, after, to the side, or something else... hilarious.

ME3 was, or at least should have been, an object lesson in what happens when a company releases a product that doesn't provide its loyal return customers with what they want. We have every reason to suspect that this lesson was learned, since they started asking--in clear and unequivocal terms--what the customers wanted for the next installment.

The responses were overwhelmingly in favor of a sequel. I can't imagine that the EA guys in ties would give our buddies in Edmonton much of a choice, really.

But what kind of sequel?

Me, I don't want anything where I'd have to live in a galaxy where any of Bioware's endings happened.

[durasteel]

iakus wrote...

But what kind of sequel?

Me, I don't want anything where I'd have to live in a galaxy where any of Bioware's endings happened.

One of the few good things about the ending is that it is so contrived that hand-waving it away requires less suspension of disbelief than taking it seriously. It would be easiy to go forward from what would basically be high EMS destroy + geth survival + one-three reapers survive and go into hiding. Relays, Citadel, and most planets are rebuilt, 10-30 years have passed.

Move forward with new stories, try to pretend the crappy ending never happend.

[Fanuilos]

durasteel wrote...

I think you're under-appreciating the potential of a sequel as a stomping ground for a new protagonist with a new ship and crew. The Reaper War did a lot of damage, and even if the relays are back online, and the Citadel is good-as-new, and the commercial center on Illum is all shiney, there are still plenty of rough edges left around the galaxy that provide opportunities for a gentle-being of fortune to turn a profit, both legitimate and nefarious.

There lies the problem with the next Mass Effect game though.  The series is based around Commander Shepard stopping a force that threatens all life and that has extinguished multiple species.  That doesn't change no matter how much Bioware says the Shepard trilogy is over.  They can try to make another game in the series without Shepard, but I'm not convinced I'll enjoy it.  They could change my mind and the game could be amazing, but given Bioware's track record the past couple years I'm not sold yet.  I'm still anticipating the game, and I want it to be amazing.  I had similar feelings towards DA2, ME3, and SWTOR though.

[Only-Twin]

The best solution is to not screw it up. It shouldn't be as hard as it sounds. They had the potential and dropped the ball.

To be specific, it would help if they focus on gameplay and character development for the time being instead of an overbearing, incoherent narrative. Hiring a skilled writer would help.

[Grizzly46]

This is discussed here as well, and there are a lot of opinions on how to go on.

I already posted my opinion on the matter there, so  I won't repeat myself that much here, but I think what's most important would be to let the player control more than was allowed in ME3, including opinions and the way to do things.

Another matter which I find annoying in this kind of games is the fact that they are (as someone said in regards to FPS) generally corridors dressed as war. There is no way you can circumvent a certain area, find quicker routes or end up deep in dead ends, simply because its not allowed. Compare this with say Fallout 3, where you can run around in a wide-open sandbox and end up waaay from your intended target if you don't check the map and compass often enough - the borders set up are much less conspicious and kind of make sense: oh, I'm over the mountains, and there we have a... desert. No need for that, let's go back..
 
This goes for buildings too, but here I think a game like SWAT 4 is a better example: buildings are built like buildings and if there is a door, you can enter it, period.

This goes back to my first point, namely control. To take away control from the player is such a dickish move it should be punishable under international law. ME1 and 2 gave good control to the player: ME3 not so much, especially since so much of the dialogue was automated, and in some instances also slapped opinions on Shepard that the player could not affect. And IIRC, this was one of many issues players had with ME3, so to at least work out that ******, think this, please Bioware:

control.

Control.

CONtrol.

CONTROL.

[Hulluliini]

They will create a game that is in accordance with their artistic vision. That should make everyone happy.

[Xamufam]

Consistency in story, plot & themes would be a great start

Modifié par Troxa, 18 décembre 2013 - 01:26 .

[DarthSliver]

durasteel wrote...

iakus wrote...

But what kind of sequel?

Me, I don't want anything where I'd have to live in a galaxy where any of Bioware's endings happened.

One of the few good things about the ending is that it is so contrived that hand-waving it away requires less suspension of disbelief than taking it seriously. It would be easiy to go forward from what would basically be high EMS destroy + geth survival + one-three reapers survive and go into hiding. Relays, Citadel, and most planets are rebuilt, 10-30 years have passed.

Move forward with new stories, try to pretend the crappy ending never happend.

I think more than 10-30 years should pass, maybe more like enough to pretty much kill off the Liara. 

I also imagine the next ME game having the prologue of redoing the ending of ME3 but without the choice we had at the end. I am one that finds that the Indocrination Theory to be still a sound use for Bioware to fix the endings of ME3. Like the Prologue would give us what really was going on at the end, than it would flash forward to the future after we create the new character. But basic point would be, the endings we saw happen seem true to Shepard. Indocrination has been a big thing throughout the Trilogy and might be the only way Bioware can handwave a
"what really happened at the end" to continue after ME3.  Otherwise a reset on the MEU might be the only other option.