59 réponses à ce sujet

[Megaton_Hope]

I have encountered many prequels and liked none of them.

Well, okay, that Falstaff guy is kind of funny. But a good story is self-contained. A story where you have to be familiar with something that happens after it chronologically is essentially hollow, requiring that other story to provide all its substance.

You can do that sort of thing with DLC, since you bought the main game first. You shouldn't do it with whole games.

[JamesFaith]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

I have encountered many prequels and liked none of them.

Well, okay, that Falstaff guy is kind of funny. But a good story is self-contained. A story where you have to be familiar with something that happens after it chronologically is essentially hollow, requiring that other story to provide all its substance.

You can do that sort of thing with DLC, since you bought the main game first. You shouldn't do it with whole games.

But you reffering to direct prequel which is connected with previous story and BW already denied that new ME would be connected with Shepard. Loose prequels don't work with detail of original story, they are just using same world and few hints to previous games in form of easter-eggs.

Good examples are Deus Ex 3 or GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas. All prequels and all quite good.  

[Megaton_Hope]

Wouldn't have to be about Shepard for it to be bad. I have a distinctly detailed vision of a bad prequel about Anderson's career as a Spectre candidate and attempts to discredit Saren Arterius during the latter's meteoric rise.

Deus Ex HR I might tend to group with the bad prequels, although a lot of the gameplay and setting elements are enjoyable. There's the difficulty with a setting like that, where if you make your storyline revolutionary enough it's usurping the revolution of the later game, and if you don't make it revolutionary enough, then nothing the hero does will matter, so he might as well not exist.

Also with Scifi one falls into the trap that the universe has to be rather less interesting than it was going to be later. Like when they plotted out Star Trek Enterprise, they set it in a period during which the Original Series had established that nobody knew what a Romulan looked like and ships couldn't travel faster than light.

[Acute]

I think a sequel far in the future would be best. With a prequel I already know how everything is going to end. And with a story set during the time-frame of the original series, but somewhere else, I'd feel like I need to get in on that Reaper war where the real action is at. It's just going to be hard to beet the scale of the original series, once you've already saved the universe from god-like space cthulhu's what else is there to do that's going to feel as grand?

[JamesFaith]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Wouldn't have to be about Shepard for it to be bad. I have a distinctly detailed vision of a bad prequel about Anderson's career as a Spectre candidate and attempts to discredit Saren Arterius during the latter's meteoric rise.

Deus Ex HR I might tend to group with the bad prequels, although a lot of the gameplay and setting elements are enjoyable. There's the difficulty with a setting like that, where if you make your storyline revolutionary enough it's usurping the revolution of the later game, and if you don't make it revolutionary enough, then nothing the hero does will matter, so he might as well not exist.

Also with Scifi one falls into the trap that the universe has to be rather less interesting than it was going to be later. Like when they plotted out Star Trek Enterprise, they set it in a period during which the Original Series had established that nobody knew what a Romulan looked like and ships couldn't travel faster than light.

Anderson is already solved in ME: Revelation and dialog in ME1.

And Enterprise isn't good example - this story was set too far from last series in too different era. In ME prequels we spoke about 10, 20 years - nearly same technologies, just different political situation.

BTW: No one on Enterprise saw Romulan on their own eyes.

[Redbelle]

Metal Gear Solid 3 - Snake Eater.

Got to be a successful sequal by essentially keeping the same character/protaganist under a different name. No need to spend time investing in a new character or learning what this character stood for. He was Snake. The rest was just details.

Plus it introduced an entirly new way of playing the game that required an involved approach, rather than give the player time to just thumb his or her Dpad and reflect on thing's while nothing much happened on screen.

And the boss fights. The End's in particular.

Modifié par Redbelle, 26 avril 2013 - 11:33 .

[SpamBot2000]

Anyone who thinks the ME3 ending was great better not be asking for a sequel.

Because those people applauded the termination of the Mass Effect Universe.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 26 avril 2013 - 11:31 .

[SpamBot2000]

Super Saiyajin wrote...

I wouldn't be angry over a FPS prequel coz that way I could save myself 120€.

120?! Whoa!

What's that, Collector's Edition + Season Pass?

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 26 avril 2013 - 01:14 .

[SpamBot2000]

It's sad that we have to automatically calculate another game's worth for DLC these days in our gaming budgets.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 26 avril 2013 - 01:24 .

[Ruadh]

A prequel doesn't even make sense with moving the ME universe forward.

Without the mother of all retcons, you'd be looking at dumbed down weapons, tech and biotics, less races, and lore wise there wouldn't even be medi-gel.

And its not like you could just travel to unexplored parts of the galaxy uncovering new species and tech without tearing apart the story and lore that the original trilogy set.

Plus, the Reapers cast a rather large shadow which any prequel would have to address. Move forward I say.

[Capt. Pancake]

May be a sidequel in some cut scenes in the intro? But yeah no prequel PLEASE I mean we all know it all leads to a moment of complete suckation
and God I swear if it comes out as a FPS I will be using the disc as a f****n' frisbee

[Bizinha]

Prequels generally do not sell well. I think it will be a sequel or a reboot.
But have no expectations.

[kathic]

Mass Effect re-imagined.

[jijeebo]

I don't really care all that much at this point as long as it's fresh and fun to play.

I would prefer a prequel/midquel but I would get over it if they went and canonised Destroy... Which is no doubt the one they would go with to minimise the backlash.

[KaiserShep]

jijeebo wrote...
I would prefer a prequel/midquel but I would get over it if they went and canonised Destroy... Which is no doubt the one they would go with to minimise the backlash.

Backlash aside, it's the ony option that really leaves room for a new story to tell. Doing anything that involves conflict in either the synthesis or control endings invalidates those choices immediately. 

[Phatose]

No it doesn't. It would only invalidate them if in control, it was Reapers vs everyone else again, and Synthesis deals specifically with organic/synthetic conflicts caused by the differences between the two.

That leaves plenty of wiggle room.

[Wynterdust]

I personally would not mind a prequel if it was about the rachni war, krogan rebellions, the morning war or even the prothean empire when they are enslaving the other races. But since (annoyingly) it has to have humans it could only be the first contact which is well covered and has virtually nothing to it so it probably would not be very successful. A sequel would most likely require canonising an ending so that probably would not get good feedback either. I can only see a sidequel or reboot working.

[Redbelle]

Simple solution to a simple problem for the sequel. If our galaxy is no longer viable then take a human, take transporter theory and invent the mass effect transportation device to another galaxy, probably Andromada since it's closest, and fire the human through it to a convinient receiver pad.

Add a narrative of how similarities exist in both galaxies and Reaper tech exists in both. Plus an explanation for why the human is standard human and not synthesised, and you can have a story set in a new galaxy with it's own politics and new alien's.

[AresKeith]

BW pretty much wrote themselves in a corner

Prequel or Sidequel wouldn't work well IMO

A sequel would be hard because of the ending

[Megaton_Hope]

JamesFaith wrote...

Anderson is already solved in ME: Revelation and dialog in ME1.

And Enterprise isn't good example - this story was set too far from last series in too different era. In ME prequels we spoke about 10, 20 years - nearly same technologies, just different political situation.

BTW: No one on Enterprise saw Romulan on their own eyes.

Well that's the thing, though.

2148 - Prothean Archive and shipyard discovered on Mars.

2152 - Foundation of Eden Prime, one of the first human colonies.

2154 - Commander Shepard's birth.

2157 - The Relay 314 Incident, First Contact War.

If you set a Mass Effect story in, let's say, 2147, then FTL is not a reality, humans have not yet made first contact with their first alien race, and humans are effectively trapped in the Sol system. You could make a setting like that, but it wouldn't be Mass Effect.

Enterprise falls prey to a similar problem, depending on what you choose to believe is the accurate description of the setting. In "The Cage," PIke talks about how the "time barrier" has recently been broken to people whose ship had crashed a little over a decade before. And in "Balance of Terror," the ships are described as being so cramped there was no room for taking prisoners, and lacking two-way visual communication. (Conflicts were also fought with "primitive nuclear weapons.") That's roughly the period that Archer's voyage is nominally set in. Yet if anything, a lot of his technology is presented as being basically more advanced than Kirk's was.

[Volc19]

Sequels have too many variables, too much room for them to make choices trivialized. With ME3 being the end, we can postulate on what our choices amounted to in the long run. ME3 is loaded with variables that would make a sequel difficult to make with any ease. The potential extinction of four races (Krogan, Rachni, Quarian and Geth), along with the wildly divergent endings, would make a good sequel nigh impossible.

I agree that any past wars or anything with Reapers would be a bad move as well. We know how the past wars end, and the only one to include humans lasted all of fifteen seconds. Any stories taking place during the Reaper War would be stale; we've been fighting Reapers for three games, we've seen the end of their arc, and Multiplayer is already basically a Reaper War side story in and of itself.

The only solution would be to place the next game in the window of time between the FCW and the start of ME3, and would be best if done during ME2 due to the weapon variance and thermal clips, along with a well-established human population across the cosmos. The story can be any sort of small-scale, personal story that is engaging, yet not world-shaking enough for it to be a continuity error for that story to have never reached Shepard's ears. This could include anything from playing a smuggler/bounty hunter/merc in the Terminus, to being a cop on the Citadel/Illium, being a high-profile assassin, working for the Shadow Broker, et cetera, ad infinitum.

A smaller scale also opens up a door to a personal story with really colorful characters a la ME2 (the one detail about ME2 that just about everyone can agree was awesome). A new protagonist opens up the possibility of having a mixed-species crew, or even a non-human protagonist, due to not being tied to the Alliance or Cerberus. We could have a female volus pilot, a vorcha doctor, a hanar comm specialist, all sorts of cool stuff.

[JamesFaith]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Well that's the thing, though. 

2148 - Prothean Archive and shipyard discovered on Mars.

2152 - Foundation of Eden Prime, one of the first human colonies.

2154 - Commander Shepard's birth.

2157 - The Relay 314 Incident, First Contact War.

If you set a Mass Effect story in, let's say, 2147, then FTL is not a reality, humans have not yet made first contact with their first alien race, and humans are effectively trapped in the Sol system. You could make a setting like that, but it wouldn't be Mass Effect.

And why should I set it in 2147, when there is 38 years between FCW and beacon on Eden Prime (2183 ) ? This still would be prequel.

Modifié par JamesFaith, 27 avril 2013 - 10:02 .