188 réponses à ce sujet

[ChaosTheory149]

Perhaps we're reading too much into it, but the recent quote by lead writer Mac Walters that ME4 won't have anything to do with Shepard's story, logically, suggests it's a prequel.  And if true, I can't be more disappointed.

Prequels are... lazy, uninspired and are a Hollywood/television trend that repeatedly fails.  Yet for whatever reason, they are one of the most popular entertainment mechanisms to everyone except the target audience.  It's a fun side trip, maybe as DLC or an expansion pack later-- but not for an entirely new game arch. 

In addition, in every single poll I've seen from the ME fanbase, the prequel vote was soundly trumped by a wish for continuation-- not necessarily of Shepard et al, but the universe and story.  Folks want to see how the galaxy picks up the pieces in an overwhelming way, and only a significant minority of fans care about the Protheans or anything else that happened prior to the events of the games.

BioWare, please...  If you're basing this thing on a prequel, go back to the drawing board and don't let the writers tell you how "hard it is to continue blah blah".  Don't destroy this franchise by going backwards just because it's the popular thing to do right now in media.

Just don't.

Modifié par ChaosTheory149, 15 octobre 2013 - 03:24 .

[MassPredator]

We should try to not do speculations and wait, iam very, very, very anxious about next ME and i want to believe that we are simply missunderstanding the info. But yes, all i read/hear sound like a prequel. We have enough anger and dissapointment with ME3 ending, i think we must wait and dont ingnite the forums like a year and a half ago until we have some confirmation. Have faith.....
(please forgive my grammar)

[ChaosTheory149]

I appreciate the reply, and I'm really not trying to "ignite the forums". But they created a monster with the ME universe, in a very good way, and in doing so folks like me have very strong opinions when we see the franchise about to take a left turn to Space Station: Crazy.

I just can't fathom how they could disregard focus group info, polls, etc and still decide that a prequel would be the way to go. If it's not a prequel, then just say, "hey, we've got some great ideas for this game, and rest assured, it's not a prequel."

But we're not hearing that.

Modifié par ChaosTheory149, 15 octobre 2013 - 03:56 .

[MassPredator]

I voted against a prequel in every poll i could, and right my spectationes in "Casey want to hear...." toppic, i really love this universe, i continue to play the trilogy over and over again, i cant discribe what ME means for me. Iam felling just like u, all "things" out there point to prequel, i hate the idea of playing something i know how its gonna end. ME is about choices and cosecuences and a prequel totally destroy the core of ME, maybe as DLC or RTS game. With this iam trying to say that i think u are right, but i choose to wait a confirmation, then, i will ignite the forum .....

[Manc4life7]

ChaosTheory149 wrote...

Perhaps we're reading too much into it, but the recent quote by lead writer Mac Walters that ME4 won't have anything to do with Shepard's story, logically, suggests it's a prequel.  And if true, I can't be more disappointed.

I agree, I really don't want a prequel, but based on the info I have seen I am not getting that "it's going to be a prequal" vibe.

A story could be easily be written to take place after some random passage of time from the conclusion of ME3, and it would not have anything directly relating to "the Shepard character or the Shepard specific companions", with the exception of setting (the ME milky way galaxy as we know it).

Modifié par Manc4life7, 15 octobre 2013 - 04:16 .

[Iakus]

It could still be an AU. In fact, that's what I'm hoping for. Same setting, same lore, same races. But one where Shepard & Co never existed, and no Reapers.

Edit:  as to disregarding players want.  I think the whole ending fiasco prety well shows they are in fact  very good at disregarding what they don't want to hear.

Modifié par iakus, 15 octobre 2013 - 04:26 .

[Han Shot First]

The quote by Walters seems to suggest either a prequel or an alternate universe setting. Or at least that was how it sounded to me, since he stated that the new game will have no connection whatsoever to any of the events Shepard was involved in.

In reading that my interest level in the next Mass Effect game dropped. I don't have much interest in either a prequel setting or an alternate universe where the events of the previous three games don't matter.

[Iakus]

And here for me an alternate universe is pretty much the only hope of rekindling my interest

[Vinchisters]

It doesn't have to be a "sequel". My money is on that it's a continuation of the series, likely set about 100 years in the future. Most of the Shepard-era characters are dead or make only small cameos, the galaxy is rebuilt and it's time for a new hero, a new team and a new threat (most likely the Leviathans).

[Chala]

"Logically, suggests it's a prequel"
You should wait and not jump into conclusions, because it could be quite the opposite, I'll give you a small example:
Tolkien's Legendarium!
All of them take place in the very same world, but not all of those books are sequel/prequel: The Silmarillion is as independant as the The Lord of the Rings and both books barely mention the events of each other.

Another case (And more related to this industry), it's Dark Sector and Warframe:
Dark Sector takes place in the near future/present, Warframe takes place on the same universe, but in a very far future to the point where humanity it's almost a completely different race/culture.

Warframe it's not a sequel to Dark Sector, but still, both games are related (i.e.:The protagonist is the founder of the faction you play). This could be the very same case for the next Mass Effect: Two stories that take places in different eras and therefore, they can't be called sequel/prequel.
In fact, it's possible to see that happening, after all, the Reaper War was the end of an era and the start of another.

[Arcian]

It won't involve Shepard, but you can bet your blue ass it will involve Cerberus.

[ChaosTheory149]

Arcian wrote...

It won't involve Shepard, but you can bet your blue ass it will involve Cerberus.

  Yeah, but one battle at a time.

Modifié par ChaosTheory149, 15 octobre 2013 - 04:38 .

[Han Shot First]

Vinchisters wrote...

It doesn't have to be a "sequel". My money is on that it's a continuation of the series, likely set about 100 years in the future. Most of the Shepard-era characters are dead or make only small cameos, the galaxy is rebuilt and it's time for a new hero, a new team and a new threat (most likely the Leviathans).

That seems unlikely in my opinion, with Walters stating that the next game will have no connection to the Shepard events. (or something to that effect) It doesn't seem possible to have a game set forward in the timeline, that isn't alternate universe, that has no connection to the events of Mass Effect 3. That statement seemed to confirm a prequel or alternate universe setting.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 15 octobre 2013 - 04:43 .

[Chala]

Arcian wrote...

It won't involve Shepard, but you can bet your blue ass it will involve Cerberus.

This is why I'm so eager to see a sequel:
More chances of not seeing Cerberus, I'm getting tired of them after these last comics... Those guys are everywhere.

[ChaosTheory149]

El_Chala_Legalizado wrote...

"Logically, suggests it's a prequel"
You should wait and not jump into conclusions, because it could be quite the opposite, I'll give you a small example:
Tolkien's Legendarium!
All of them take place in the very same world, but not all of those books are sequel/prequel: The Silmarillion is as independant as the The Lord of the Rings and both books barely mention the events of each other.

Another case (And more related to this industry), it's Dark Sector and Warframe:
Dark Sector takes place in the near future/present, Warframe takes place on the same universe, but in a very far future to the point where humanity it's almost a completely different race/culture.

Warframe it's not a sequel to Dark Sector, but still, both games are related (i.e.:The protagonist is the founder of the faction you play). This could be the very same case for the next Mass Effect: Two stories that take places in different eras and therefore, they can't be called sequel/prequel.
In fact, it's possible to see that happening, after all, the Reaper War was the end of an era and the start of another.

I get what you're saying, however, the events at the end of ME3 are galaxy-wide events, which would be nearly impossible to disassociate from even the most distant, backwater civs.  Everyone would know about it-- and therefore, it would have something to do with Shepard's story.  The quoted writer goes out of his way to emphasize that it doesn't.  So unless you're playing a non-sentient Tribble on an outer rim planet in ME4, the events of ME3 likely haven't happened yet.  

Thus making it a prequel. 

Modifié par ChaosTheory149, 15 octobre 2013 - 04:44 .

[Iakus]

Arcian wrote...

It won't involve Shepard, but you can bet your blue ass it will involve Cerberus.

Given the Space Iluminati theme of Foundation, I believe it.

[Han Shot First]

ChaosTheory149 wrote...

El_Chala_Legalizado wrote...

"Logically, suggests it's a prequel"
You should wait and not jump into conclusions, because it could be quite the opposite, I'll give you a small example:
Tolkien's Legendarium!
All of them take place in the very same world, but not all of those books are sequel/prequel: The Silmarillion is as independant as the The Lord of the Rings and both books barely mention the events of each other.

Another case (And more related to this industry), it's Dark Sector and Warframe:
Dark Sector takes place in the near future/present, Warframe takes place on the same universe, but in a very far future to the point where humanity it's almost a completely different race/culture.

Warframe it's not a sequel to Dark Sector, but still, both games are related (i.e.:The protagonist is the founder of the faction you play). This could be the very same case for the next Mass Effect: Two stories that take places in different eras and therefore, they can't be called sequel/prequel.
In fact, it's possible to see that happening, after all, the Reaper War was the end of an era and the start of another.

I get what you're saying, however, the events at the end of ME3 are galaxy-wide events, which would be nearly impossible to disassociate from even the most distant, backwater civs.  Everyone would know about it-- and therefore, it would have something to do with Shepard's story.  The quoted writer goes out of his way to emphasize that it doesn't.  So unless you're playing a non-sentient Tribble on an outer rim planet in ME4, the events of ME3 likely haven't happened yet.  

Thus making it a prequel. 

While I agree that Walters' statement pretty much confirms that it won't be a sequel, I don't think there is anything in that statement confirming that it s prequel. It could also be set in an alternate universe, where Shepard, the Reapers, and the events of the original trilogy don't exist or never happened.

Or they could go the Star Trek voyager route and have the main character be an explorer 'lost' deep in new, uncharted territories, with no knowledge of the Reapers or the events of the Mass effect trilogy. Lets say an explorer opens up an uncharted relay at some point just before Eden Prime and gets beamed to the Andromeda galaxy and for whatever reason is stranded and unable to make a return trip. You'd then have a character and events completely divorced from the Shepard trilogy while still existing in the same universe, and running on the same timeline as the Shepard trilogy.

There are a couple different possibilities for a game that is not a sequel.

[DextroDNA]

I hate the idea of an alternative universe. There's only been 3 games and you guys want to switch continuities already? I want to play in a Galaxy where things have happened. I want people in the game to remember the Reaper War and Shepard.

[Rixatrix]

ChaosTheory149 wrote...

Perhaps we're reading too much into it, but the recent quote by lead writer Mac Walters that ME4 won't have anything to do with Shepard's story, logically, suggests it's a prequel.  And if true, I can't be more disappointed.

Right there with you, buddy.

What was the actual quote?  IIRC it was that ME4 would be unrelated to Shepard or the events of Shepard's story.  If that's the case, I think it just means we're done with Reapers, Cerberus, Collectors, etc.  Glass-half-full-me hopes this means a new trilogy set a couple of centuries after the first three games, with a new Big Bad, and no Shepard (or his squadmates) - other than perhaps a passing mention or codex entry.

Glass-half-empty-me has a sneaking suspicion it will be a First Contact War prequel.   A story in which we know all the main events, the outcome, the races, and the major players?  Awesome, right?!?!  <_<  The major pro for this one would be that it's game development on easy mode, but BioWare wouldn't take the easy way out, right?  Right?

AU is possible, but in my opinion, unlikely.  You can just imagine the ****storm from players: "WTF MY SHEP PICKED THE BLUE/GREEN/RED LAZER WHAT ABOUT THE REAPERZ WHERE IS LIARA" ...  Perhaps we will get something involving the newly introduced raloi species, or if they really want something unrelated to Shepard, then maybe the discovery of a new galaxy (and its species, politics, and problems).

My ME4 preferred settings, in order:
1. Sequel a couple of centuries away in Milky Way (no Reapers, no Cerberus, etc.)
2. Sequel set in a newly-discovered galaxy (which would definitely have the political missions BioWare so loves)
3. AU
....
∞. Prequel of any kind 

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 15 octobre 2013 - 05:07 .

[Sanunes]

Right now what I am expecting is Shepard and crew aren't part of the game and it won't focus on any of the issues of the first three games. It doesn't have to be an alternate universe or prequel for those conditions to happen.

Its just seems to be like any post by a BioWare employee people read ten words into every one said.

[Han Shot First]

Sanunes wrote...

Right now what I am expecting is Shepard and crew aren't part of the game and it won't focus on any of the issues of the first three games. It doesn't have to be an alternate universe or prequel for those conditions to happen.

Its just seems to be like any post by a BioWare employee people read ten words into every one said.

Here is the relevant quote by Walters:

"Well, I can’t get into details, but the idea is that we have agreed to tell a story that doesn’t relate necessarily to any of the Shepard events at all, whatsoever. Beyond that, that’s what we’ve been deciding for awhile. But throughout it all, one of the key things is that it has to be Mass Effect. It can’t just feel like a spin-off. It has to feel like a Mass Effect game at its heart, at its core. Just without the Shepard character or the Shepard specific companions."

I don't think fans are reading too far into things in seeing that bolded bit as indicating that the game won't be a sequel. Rather than saying that the next game won't have any connection to Shepard, he says that it won't have any connection to the "Shepard events." It would be impossible to have a sequel setting that doesn't mention in any way the Reaper War and does not deal at all with the consequences of the endings of the Shepard trilogy.

[Manc4life7]

Han Shot First wrote...

Vinchisters wrote...

It doesn't have to be a "sequel". My money is on that it's a continuation of the series, likely set about 100 years in the future. Most of the Shepard-era characters are dead or make only small cameos, the galaxy is rebuilt and it's time for a new hero, a new team and a new threat (most likely the Leviathans).

That seems unlikely in my opinion, with Walters stating that the next game will have no connection to the Shepard events. (or something to that effect) It doesn't seem possible to have a game set forward in the timeline, that isn't alternate universe, that has no connection to the events of Mass Effect 3. That statement seemed to confirm a prequel or alternate universe setting.

If everyone is referring to the same Walters interview, as we appear to be, the key quotes are as follows:

"Well, I can't get into details, but the idea is that we have agreed to
tell a story that doesn't relate necessarily to any of the Shepard
events at all, whatsoever,"

and

"That's what we've been deciding for a while. But throughout it all, one of the key things is that it has to be Mass Effect. It can't just feel like a spin-off. It has to feel like a Mass Effect game at its heart, at its core. Just without the Shepard character or the Shepard specific companions."

That second quote is the more important one, in my opinion, because he doesn't leave himself wiggle room like he does we when qualifies that first "events" line with that tricky little word, "necessarily".  When I read these quotes together I most definately feel like he is hinting that the new game(s) will not feature Shepard or any of the ME1-3 characters, but will take place in a ME universe where the Reaper war alreadyhas or will one day occur.

But who knows - maybe it will be a straight up alternate universe where Shepard and the Reapers never existed.

[Manc4life7]

Han Shot First wrote...

I don't think fans are reading too far into things in seeing that bolded bit as indicating that the game won't be a sequel. Rather than saying that the next game won't have any connection to Shepard, he says that it won't have any connection to the "Shepard events." It would be impossible to have a sequel setting that doesn't mention in any way the Reaper War and does not deal at all with the consequences of the endings of the Shepard trilogy.

What I feel like some people are missing is that a story can be told in the same universe as the Reaper War and Shepard without being directly related to it/him/her.

I can tell a story about the Gulf War that has no direct relation to or involvment with the events of WWII, but that doesn't mean that in my story-world WWII didn't happen.

EDIT:  I'll take this a step further.  I think most people would agree the following statment is, for the most part, correct:

The events of Mass Effect 2 are not directly related to the First Contact War.

See where I am going with this?  Making a Mass Effect game (I won't even call it a sequal) set X hundred years after the events of the Reaper War does not make what Walters said dishonest or incorrect.

Modifié par Manc4life7, 15 octobre 2013 - 05:32 .

[Han Shot First]

The thing that grabs my attention is the use of the phrase "Shepard events," rather than just Shepard.

To me that seems to indicate not just that the game won't relate to Shepard, but also won't relate to any of the events he participated in. That seems to rule out a sequel, as you can't move forward without referencing or addressing the events of the Reaper War.

The question is if that is what Mac actually meant, or whether he poorly phrased that statement.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 15 octobre 2013 - 05:31 .

[Bizantura]

Where you read between the lines "prequel", I read no connection what so ever with the trilogy just new game in the ME setting.
But we will have to wait and see Bioware says a lot of things....