MEU has been used before and makes sense.
Chris isn't entirely correct in saying "that's the only detail we know". It was blogged or tweeted by a dev a couple months back that the next MEU project was moved to ..er Montreal? (iirc)
But as far as content. He's quite right. (duh)
Not Mass Effect 4
Débuté par
Kezzup
, janv. 26 2013 06:27
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 30 janvier 2013 - 10:54
ForceXev
-
- Members
- 321 messages
Selene Moonsong wrote...
apascone wrote...
I do not understand what you are talking about Selene. In a time context , I only know of 3 possible situations. The events happen before, during or after another set of events.
They can be set before during or after any point of Shepherds story. We may never see or hear about Shep or even know what he's doing. But it has to be done either during, after or before what Shep did. Or am I mising something?
See bold modifier by me in your quoted comment. In that case, timeframe has no meaning.
This kind of talk makes me so nervous about ME4 (or whatever you want to call it). Of course timeframe has meaning! You are developing an IP that may continue in various mediums for many years. Establishing the canon for that universe is important. You can't be so aloof about something as important as the timeframe of the story. If somebody asks when the story takes place, is the answer going to be "oh I dunno... whenever" with a nonchalant shrug? Could they do that with Star Wars? If someone asked the timeframe for The Old Republic, would the answer "timeframe has no meaning because it's not about Luke Skywalker" be at all acceptable to Star Wars fans?
This is an absolute fact: the next Mass Effect game takes place before, during or after the events in ME1-3 and that timeframe has to be clearly established in the game's story. If you try to put ME4 into some weird time-bubble and refuse to establish it in relation to ME1-3, you'll anger fans even more than the ending of ME3 did.
Modifié par ForceXev, 30 janvier 2013 - 10:55 .
#28
Posté 30 janvier 2013 - 11:07
Kroitz
-
- Members
- 2 441 messages
Selene Moonsong wrote...
apascone wrote...
I do not understand what you are talking about Selene. In a time context , I only know of 3 possible situations. The events happen before, during or after another set of events.
They can be set before during or after any point of Shepherds story. We may never see or hear about Shep or even know what he's doing. But it has to be done either during, after or before what Shep did. Or am I mising something?
See bold modifier by me in your quoted comment. In that case, timeframe has no meaning.
If you don´t see why your argument is lacking information to make your point Selene I don´t know how to explain it.
The events of ME1 - 3 might never be touched nor talked about, but if it is set in the same universe, it can only take place before, during or after Shepard´s story. The act of seeing or hearing about Shepard has nothing to do with the timeframe the next game is set in.
#29
Posté 30 janvier 2013 - 11:09
The Real Bowser
-
- Members
- 703 messages
I don't care what it's about, I just care about the ending and the closure it provides. I hope they learned their lessons from ME3. If you're going to cut content, don't cut the ending.
#30
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 01:20
Only-Twin
-
- Members
- 356 messages
Well it can't really happen before Mass Effect because humans are newcomers, and I'm sure they won't just re-do the Reaper war from another perspective. Taking place after ME3 is the only time-frame that makes sense to me. Unless they decide to create a wormhole and go all Star Trek on us.
#31
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 02:21
kalpain
-
- Members
- 437 messages
BladyMZ wrote...
Mass Effect Next. MEN.
"I hope we get more romance options in MEN"
"MEN should have more loyalty missions"
"Can't wait to get my hands on MEN"
Like a boss.
This is exactly the same acronym I came up with
#32
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 03:12
Battlebloodmage
-
- Members
- 8 698 messages
Mass Effect: The Next Generation
#33
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 11:31
DirtyPhoenix
-
- Members
- 3 938 messages
BladyMZ wrote...
Mass Effect Next. MEN.
"I hope we get more romance options in MEN"
"MEN should have more loyalty missions"
"Can't wait to get my hands on MEN"
Like a boss.
ahahahahaha lolz!!
#34
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 12:02
ozthegweat
-
- Members
- 598 messages
Kroitz wrote...
Selene Moonsong wrote...
apascone wrote...
I do not understand what you are talking about Selene. In a time context , I only know of 3 possible situations. The events happen before, during or after another set of events.
They can be set before during or after any point of Shepherds story. We may never see or hear about Shep or even know what he's doing. But it has to be done either during, after or before what Shep did. Or am I mising something?
See bold modifier by me in your quoted comment. In that case, timeframe has no meaning.
If you don´t see why your argument is lacking information to make your point Selene I don´t know how to explain it.
The events of ME1 - 3 might never be touched nor talked about, but if it is set in the same universe, it can only take place before, during or after Shepard´s story. The act of seeing or hearing about Shepard has nothing to do with the timeframe the next game is set in.
Well, there could be two additional options:
- It takes place in an alternate universe, kinda like "what if the Protheans did defeat the Reapers
- It takes place in another galaxy where there are no humans, Turians, Asari etc.. Then it would really have no meaning when the events of ME1-3 in "our" galaxy are happening, as you'll never hear about them and don't live in a world where you're affected by them. Yes, technically those events still have to take place before, during or after the events of this GIAG (game in another galaxy), but it could very well be that it will never be mentioned what time it is in "our" galaxy, as it has absolutely no relevancy whatsoever. Perhaps people in this other galaxy don't even know about "our" galaxy. We for sure don't know about intelligent life in other galaxies.
#35
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 12:26
X086573
-
- Members
- 180 messages
Not to hijack the above post, but just so i'm clear:
this ME+ either takes places in a new galaxy entirely, meaning that anything that happened in ME1-3 doesn't matter, because as posted above they aren't even relevant to this upcoming story (which is a little bit of a bummer, because we've all come to love these systems, lore, and races you guys have come up w/)
or, it happens in an alternate reality in the current galaxy, where we get to keep all that we know and love, but the reaper story/shepards story isn't a concern because technically it never happened, and this would be an off branch of that, not conforming to the continuity of ME1-3.
Either way, both of those sound like a bummer to me. I'll still be buying ME+ (well, not if it's an MMO), but to think that we can either ditch everything we know about ME (so why would it even be called ME), or keep it, just throw out all that happened these last 3 games is kinda sad.
this ME+ either takes places in a new galaxy entirely, meaning that anything that happened in ME1-3 doesn't matter, because as posted above they aren't even relevant to this upcoming story (which is a little bit of a bummer, because we've all come to love these systems, lore, and races you guys have come up w/)
or, it happens in an alternate reality in the current galaxy, where we get to keep all that we know and love, but the reaper story/shepards story isn't a concern because technically it never happened, and this would be an off branch of that, not conforming to the continuity of ME1-3.
Either way, both of those sound like a bummer to me. I'll still be buying ME+ (well, not if it's an MMO), but to think that we can either ditch everything we know about ME (so why would it even be called ME), or keep it, just throw out all that happened these last 3 games is kinda sad.
#36
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 12:35
surleygentelman
-
- Members
- 156 messages
The next game needs to be Mass Effect four, regardless if Shepard is alive or dead or melted into space goo. Bioware needs to be intelligent about this supposed sequel/prequel. I personally have no issues with the Mass Effect series as it currently stands, but clearly not everyone shares my opinion. So Bioware needs to prove that they are not out of touch fans and not out right morons so they should be very careful when creating this next game. The name will not be as important the content.
#37
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 12:39
Kroitz
-
- Members
- 2 441 messages
ozthegweat wrote...
Kroitz wrote...
Selene Moonsong wrote...
apascone wrote...
I do not understand what you are talking about Selene. In a time context , I only know of 3 possible situations. The events happen before, during or after another set of events.
They can be set before during or after any point of Shepherds story. We may never see or hear about Shep or even know what he's doing. But it has to be done either during, after or before what Shep did. Or am I mising something?
See bold modifier by me in your quoted comment. In that case, timeframe has no meaning.
If you don´t see why your argument is lacking information to make your point Selene I don´t know how to explain it.
The events of ME1 - 3 might never be touched nor talked about, but if it is set in the same universe, it can only take place before, during or after Shepard´s story. The act of seeing or hearing about Shepard has nothing to do with the timeframe the next game is set in.
Well, there could be two additional options:
- It takes place in an alternate universe, kinda like "what if the Protheans did defeat the Reapers
- It takes place in another galaxy where there are no humans, Turians, Asari etc.. Then it would really have no meaning when the events of ME1-3 in "our" galaxy are happening, as you'll never hear about them and don't live in a world where you're affected by them. Yes, technically those events still have to take place before, during or after the events of this GIAG (game in another galaxy), but it could very well be that it will never be mentioned what time it is in "our" galaxy, as it has absolutely no relevancy whatsoever. Perhaps people in this other galaxy don't even know about "our" galaxy. We for sure don't know about intelligent life in other galaxies.
That is a fine example for an argument, imho.
Yes, that would make the common timeframe obsolete for the next ME.
#38
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 01:31
PainCakesx
-
- Members
- 693 messages
There are a couple of paths for BioWare to take, some good and some not so good (I generally hate prequels myself).
Completely shoving the pre-existing MEU and creating a new one in a different galaxy with no humans nor any races from the MEU, and one which bears very little resemblance to the current MEU is probably the least likely route they'll go. It would be a marketing nightmare.
I've said this many times, and I'll reiterate it. A vast majority of people buy ME games because they want to revisit the MEU with a new story. Remove the MEU, and you have effectively killed what makes ME what it is.
Completely shoving the pre-existing MEU and creating a new one in a different galaxy with no humans nor any races from the MEU, and one which bears very little resemblance to the current MEU is probably the least likely route they'll go. It would be a marketing nightmare.
I've said this many times, and I'll reiterate it. A vast majority of people buy ME games because they want to revisit the MEU with a new story. Remove the MEU, and you have effectively killed what makes ME what it is.
Modifié par PainCakesx, 31 janvier 2013 - 01:32 .
#39
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 05:05
Only-Twin
-
- Members
- 356 messages
As for the actual name, they should just accept calling it ME4. No subtitles or anything. Just because 4 comes after 3 doesn't have to make it a continuation. For example, Resistance 3 to my knowledge has hardly any remnants from the previous game.
Modifié par Only-Twin, 31 janvier 2013 - 05:05 .
#40
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 05:14
Kezzup
-
- Members
- 80 messages
I believe BioWare's just saying that those things are a POSSIBILITY for the next game. It could still very well be a standard sequel or prequel or whatever.X086573 wrote...
Not to hijack the above post, but just so i'm clear:
this ME+ either takes places in a new galaxy entirely, meaning that anything that happened in ME1-3 doesn't matter, because as posted above they aren't even relevant to this upcoming story (which is a little bit of a bummer, because we've all come to love these systems, lore, and races you guys have come up w/)
or, it happens in an alternate reality in the current galaxy, where we get to keep all that we know and love, but the reaper story/shepards story isn't a concern because technically it never happened, and this would be an off branch of that, not conforming to the continuity of ME1-3.
Either way, both of those sound like a bummer to me. I'll still be buying ME+ (well, not if it's an MMO), but to think that we can either ditch everything we know about ME (so why would it even be called ME), or keep it, just throw out all that happened these last 3 games is kinda sad.
#41
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 06:41
Morogrem
-
- Members
- 166 messages
[quote]Kezzup wrote...
For those of you unaware, Chris Priestly recently wrote THIS on another thread here on this forum:
[quote]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...".
[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]
[/quote]
that.... doesnt make any sense, it doesnt come before, or after or off to the side? so it exists within a pocket universe all of its own? Plus, we actually know more than what he said... we know three things, (1) the protagonist will be human, (2) the protagonist will not be shep, and (3) the protagonist will not be a shep clone (ie: not another soldier).
Now, with the 1st thing in consideration it will most likely take place in this universe, which means it has to take place at some point before during or after unless it takes place, as I said before inside a pocket universe.... which would just be silly. And considering the world changing ramifications of the end of the original trilogy, I honestly don't understand how they think they can get away with not working off what happens next. I understand not wanting to bogg yourself down, but seriously? People want to know what happens next, and you can easily work off the back of those endings by switching things around and then moving them back from treebranches to roots, into the base of another tree (as they once discribed the way choices would work in the trilogy, the first would be a base, not many choices effecting much, the second game would be branches, the third would be WAY more branches). They did it before, albeit not well, with dragon age 2, they could do it again.
So either A) this guy's (the quote, not the OP) trying to mislead us, no blame here, its something every company does when they don't want people to expect the moon, and considering what happened with the endings, its extremely understandable for them to want to temper our excitement. Or
its going to exist within a pocket universe.... which is more likely?
For those of you unaware, Chris Priestly recently wrote THIS on another thread here on this forum:
[quote]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...".
[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]
[/quote]
that.... doesnt make any sense, it doesnt come before, or after or off to the side? so it exists within a pocket universe all of its own? Plus, we actually know more than what he said... we know three things, (1) the protagonist will be human, (2) the protagonist will not be shep, and (3) the protagonist will not be a shep clone (ie: not another soldier).
Now, with the 1st thing in consideration it will most likely take place in this universe, which means it has to take place at some point before during or after unless it takes place, as I said before inside a pocket universe.... which would just be silly. And considering the world changing ramifications of the end of the original trilogy, I honestly don't understand how they think they can get away with not working off what happens next. I understand not wanting to bogg yourself down, but seriously? People want to know what happens next, and you can easily work off the back of those endings by switching things around and then moving them back from treebranches to roots, into the base of another tree (as they once discribed the way choices would work in the trilogy, the first would be a base, not many choices effecting much, the second game would be branches, the third would be WAY more branches). They did it before, albeit not well, with dragon age 2, they could do it again.
So either A) this guy's (the quote, not the OP) trying to mislead us, no blame here, its something every company does when they don't want people to expect the moon, and considering what happened with the endings, its extremely understandable for them to want to temper our excitement. Or
its going to exist within a pocket universe.... which is more likely?
#42
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 06:43
Exeider
-
- Members
- 590 messages
Selene Moonsong wrote...
apascone wrote...
I do not understand what you are talking about Selene. In a time context , I only know of 3 possible situations. The events happen before, during or after another set of events.
They can be set before during or after any point of Shepherds story. We may never see or hear about Shep or even know what he's doing. But it has to be done either during, after or before what Shep did. Or am I mising something?
See bold modifier by me in your quoted comment. In that case, timeframe has no meaning.
What!? Of course it will have meaning, because the only way to know one's position in a time line is by reference points to other positions in a time line. It may not matter to the STORY whether we eve hear about shepard, but people will be trying to figure out what point in time the next game will take place.
#43
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 06:49
Exeider
-
- Members
- 590 messages
Chris Priestly wrote...
To call the next game Mass Effect 4
or ME4 is doing it a disservice...
No more so then having Casey and Mac have their grubby little hands involved in it.
-AE
#44
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 06:56
BioWareM0d13
-
- Members
- 21 133 messages
If it is set after the Shepard Trilogy there is nothing wrong with calling it ME4, even though its going to have a different protagonist and likely different villains.
ME4 only becomes inaccurate if the game ends up being a prequel or is set during the Shepard Trilogy. If Bioware has been paying attention to fan feedback however, it will be neither of those things. The fans overwhelmingly are more interested in a sequel. They want to see how their decisions during the Shepard Trilogy have affected the game universe, and a sequel offers oppurtunities for the writers to pull off some suprises, whereas prequels do not.
For simplicity's sake I'm going to keep calling it ME4 until Bioware announces the game is either a sequel or is set during the Shepard Trilogy. Everyone automatically knows what I mean if I type 'ME4' and there is a very good chance the game will be a sequel.
ME4 only becomes inaccurate if the game ends up being a prequel or is set during the Shepard Trilogy. If Bioware has been paying attention to fan feedback however, it will be neither of those things. The fans overwhelmingly are more interested in a sequel. They want to see how their decisions during the Shepard Trilogy have affected the game universe, and a sequel offers oppurtunities for the writers to pull off some suprises, whereas prequels do not.
For simplicity's sake I'm going to keep calling it ME4 until Bioware announces the game is either a sequel or is set during the Shepard Trilogy. Everyone automatically knows what I mean if I type 'ME4' and there is a very good chance the game will be a sequel.
#45
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 07:23
rapscallioness
-
- Members
- 8 030 messages
The name Mass Effect will have no meaning if ...game X...occurs in a diff galaxy altogether that has no Mass Relays.
Wasn't that the whole thing behind the term "mass effect"?
Sounds to me like they're skipping town on the Milky Way. That was prolly the whole point w/the massive destruction we saw in the original ending.
It didn't matter what state the galaxy was left in. It didn't matter what happened to the alien races, or the relays, or the citadel. Because it's over.
That's what this nitpicking over fans calling it me4 and talking abt canon seems to imply. At least to me.
edit: and honestly, I'm okay with that. As long as "X" has good, solid story. Meaningful choice/consequence. Interesting characters and a sci-fi setting...then fine. I'm sure Montreal can mke a good shooter. I just hope they can bring it w/the rest.
We'll see.
But really, if that's the case, stop asking us if we want a sequel or prequel.
Wasn't that the whole thing behind the term "mass effect"?
Sounds to me like they're skipping town on the Milky Way. That was prolly the whole point w/the massive destruction we saw in the original ending.
It didn't matter what state the galaxy was left in. It didn't matter what happened to the alien races, or the relays, or the citadel. Because it's over.
That's what this nitpicking over fans calling it me4 and talking abt canon seems to imply. At least to me.
edit: and honestly, I'm okay with that. As long as "X" has good, solid story. Meaningful choice/consequence. Interesting characters and a sci-fi setting...then fine. I'm sure Montreal can mke a good shooter. I just hope they can bring it w/the rest.
We'll see.
But really, if that's the case, stop asking us if we want a sequel or prequel.
Modifié par rapscallioness, 31 janvier 2013 - 07:28 .
#46
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 08:54
PainCakesx
-
- Members
- 693 messages
All I can say is that this talk of a "new galaxy" or "new universe" really has me worried about ME4.
Shoving the MEU to the side is NOT the way to go. At all.
Shoving the MEU to the side is NOT the way to go. At all.
#47
Posté 31 janvier 2013 - 09:26
rapscallioness
-
- Members
- 8 030 messages
PainCakesx wrote...
All I can say is that this talk of a "new galaxy" or "new universe" really has me worried about ME4.
Shoving the MEU to the side is NOT the way to go. At all.
Honestly, I don't think they even know what they're gonna do. Besides sum very rough drafts here and there.
I really have no idea, myself. They're just talking real funny. It makes my eye twitch...
#48
Posté 01 février 2013 - 05:40
Exeider
-
- Members
- 590 messages
rapscallioness wrote...
PainCakesx wrote...
All I can say is that this talk of a "new galaxy" or "new universe" really has me worried about ME4.
Shoving the MEU to the side is NOT the way to go. At all.
Honestly, I don't think they even know what they're gonna do. Besides sum very rough drafts here and there.
I really have no idea, myself. They're just talking real funny. It makes my eye twitch...
For want of a nail, guys, it's an old parable:
For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the message was lost.
For want of a message the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
The point is, and this is what people were talking about, because Mac and Casey locked out their own team from the ending development, it wasn't peer reviewed, because if it was, the team would have pointed out the fact that such a "FINAL" ending, not just for shepard but everyone and everything, makes trying to make a new mass effect pretty much impossible.
And even sans Shepard, if we can't play in the milkyway, with the aliens we know and love, and in the "universe" we are familar with, then how is it Mass Effect, the answer it isn't. The same could be said if it was taken into the far future or past. It just wouldn't feel the same.
Mass Effect was different because of what it was, but more importantly of what it wasn't, it wasn't Star Trek or Star Wars, two series who's qualities seem to permiate all of scifi, ANY scifi is pretty much measured on whether it's using the Star Wars or Star Trek rule books. If it;s Sci-Fantasy then it's Star Wars, if it's Technobabble, then it's Star Trek.
But then you have things like Babylon 5, that are grounded in real science, with some elements of fantasy, this realm isn't a class of it's own, but it's a rarely visted area, and that's where Mass Effect also resides.
Yes, ME has it's version of the force, but it is explained in a seemingly logical technobabble sense. Alot of the technology is very Trek-ish, but still grounded in reality.
To create a world that can have it's fantasy elements that are grounded in reality, that make sense and is a deep story and universe, is a very very very hard thing to create. just ask J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5. It's very hard thing to do. But Bioware did it, Bio ware had it, and then Bio Ware effed it up. It's almost like they were afraid of their own success, but i digress.
My point is, it is because of the ending we got, that precludes anything after, shepard or not, present time or not. The ending changed SO many things on such an EPIC level, that it pretty much means you CAN'T have another game or story of anykind and that it makes sense.
this is WHY, the fans and the even the developers themselves that have managed to get out their personal opinions have had such a reaction to the ending the way they did. Because what it really means is no more Mass Effect.
Even if Bioware develops a new game, it won't be Mass Effect, not really. They have in essence killed the spirit of what they had, which people apparently identified with greatly because of just the sheer extreme reaction. I don't know what it is about Mass Effect that people loved so much, the epic scale, the depth and human like quality of characters, the sense of groundedness in reality, the feeling it COULD happen, or is it something more?
I don't know, but what I DO know, is that this will be remembered for future gaming history, when another epic IP comes along that people latch onto, I guarentee those fans will say to the developers " don't pull a bioware" or "don't pull a Mass Effect 3" it will become a colloquialism and hopefully it will prevent a future edition of this from happening again.
I hope that in a few years, and maybe hopfully after a "cleaning of house" at bioware, Someone will finance a remake of ME3, they do it with movies, why the hell not a video game. Mass Effect 3 Redux or something like that.
I have played all 3 games again, and I am telling you there is noticiable difference of EVERYTHING when you go from 1 and 2 to 3. I mean everything, the music, the lighting, the colors, the tempo, the rythem, EVERYTHING, it just feels off, I never really understood it until I played all the games back to back to back with a NEW Shepard, everything is feeling great and running high until I get to 3 then it just feels weird. I don't know how to put my finger on it but it just feels weird.
-AE
Modifié par Exeider, 01 février 2013 - 07:03 .
#49
Posté 06 février 2013 - 04:51
Yanick Roy
-
- BioWare Employees
-
- 11 messages
Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway.
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is
not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway.
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is
not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!
Modifié par Chris Priestly, 06 février 2013 - 05:43 .
#50
Posté 06 février 2013 - 04:57
PainCakesx
-
- Members
- 693 messages
Yanick Roy wrote...
Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m
going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass
Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight
evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we
are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we
have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward
instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of
the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new
story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the
first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they
likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of
after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or
sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use
always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently
flawed. But let me use one anyway.
If you had three games centered around a group of key
soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game
about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have
many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have
to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second,
but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is
not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that
we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early
enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate
quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what
you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team
intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re
heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the
next ME game as ME4 internally!
A appreciate the post! :happy:
I know you can't give much away, but would it be fair to say that at the very least, the galaxy we know and love containing all the aliens, lore, history etc. from the previous trilogy will remain in tact even if Shepard's story is done?
