71 réponses à ce sujet

[The-Biotic-God]

So I've being thinking that a prequel could be a good idea for the new Mass Effect. It would be interesting to see the origins of some wars like the genophage virus being spread, or the humans/turians dislike. What do you think could be a good idea for the new Mass Effect?

Modifié par The-Biotic-God, 26 novembre 2013 - 07:17 .

[Clayless]

Sequel only.

Or I guess "alongside ME3" would also be fine too.

[JamesFaith]

Known historical events like Genophage, Morning war or First contact war would be better as some books then videogame prequels, because such stories need more then one (players) perspective.

Videogame prequel should concentrate on some smaller scale, previously unknown event with decision tied with this event and characters - f.e. local war in Terminus systems.

[David7204]

Prequels suck.

[Sion1138]

I think there are far too many limitations that would prevent the story from having appropriate weight and scope.

Epic stories is what I have come to expect from BioWare over the years, and while I am not as pretentious as to demand that they do this or that, I can say with confidence that I will not care for anything other than a sequel or alternate universe setting.

There is plenty of material within the novels and comics to satisfy anyone looking for more insight into past events, and there surely will be more of that in the future so it hardly makes sense to me to explore these avenues in the games also.

David7204 wrote...
Prequels suck.

Agreed.

Modifié par Sion1138, 26 novembre 2013 - 06:50 .

[The-Biotic-God]

JamesFaith wrote...

Known historical events like Genophage, Morning war or First contact war would be better as some books then videogame prequels, because such stories need more then one (players) perspective.

Videogame prequel should concentrate on some smaller scale, previously unknown event with decision tied with this event and characters - f.e. local war in Terminus systems.

Putting it that way, you're right. Prequels can really decrease the
amount of "freedom" Mass Effect has given us with taking decisions.

Maybe a new menace in a future point of the ME universe.

[TMZuk]

Nothing. ME is done. Broken beyond repair.

Better make a new SF franchise with a fresh start.

[Arcian]

David7204 wrote...

Prequels suck.

These are the only two sensible words I have ever seen you post on the BSN, David.

[dreamgazer]

Arcian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Prequels suck.

These are the only two sensible words I have ever seen you post on the BSN, David.

Yarp.

Even though they're out there, the exceptions are few and far between.

[SNascimento]

For the love of the gods, not a prequel!

[Malanek]

No, I don't really want a prequel. I think they could still make a good game as a prequel and I will still get it regardless, but a prequel is naturally less compelling and there is no good real known period in the past that demands further explanation.

[ruggly]

I would vastly prefer a sequel over a prequel, but if they're not going to touch the trilogy ever again then I'm not sure how they could really do a sequel without referring to it. Only through an AU, really, but I know a lot of people wouldn't like that either.

[wirelesstkd]

The problem with a prequel is that mankind has only been using relays for 35 years. There's just not a lot of room to maneuver before the Shepard Events started.

Of course, the problem with a direct sequel is that you'd have to canonize an ending. But I'd prefer that approach (sequel), personally.

[JamesFaith]

wirelesstkd wrote...

The problem with a prequel is that mankind has only been using relays for 35 years. There's just not a lot of room to maneuver before the Shepard Events started.

Whole Shepard trilogy was about 5 years long, so why 35 years isn't enough?

Most RPGs need less then year, even longest BW game (DA2) was much shorter then this era.  

[Stakrin]

Sequel only


Only sequels, never liked a prequel and an alternate universe makes Shepard pointless and an alongside doesn't really matter.

[SwobyJ]

wirelesstkd wrote...

The problem with a prequel is that mankind has only been using relays for 35 years. There's just not a lot of room to maneuver before the Shepard Events started.

Of course, the problem with a direct sequel is that you'd have to canonize an ending. But I'd prefer that approach (sequel), personally.

They don't have to canonize an ending.

[Flamewielder]

Make it a sequel, set it 2 or 3 centuries into the future; the actual color of your ending wouldn't matter... but could flavor your campaign differently in terms of abilities, etc... I'm curious to see if being an organic/synthetic hybrid will offer new possibilities. Then again, you can make these same abilities available through nanotech in the red or blue endings as well...

And if you didn't stop the Reapers, well... sucks to be extinct, but then extinct races don't buy games, do they?

[Karlone123]

David7204 wrote...

Prequels suck.

My first favourite comment I undestand perfectly from David for once.

[Excella Gionne]

Since ME3 ending(s) cannot be cannoned, it cannot follow the story of Shepard, nor can it relate to it. It has to be a different universe, but it can still have the same aliens. I hope the same aliens are still in the new one, or I'd be ******.

[Cribbian]

Sequel

[SwobyJ]

Priority for me:

1. Sequel, direct or indirect (not talking about 'connection to Shepard' here)
2. Prequel (but not in a typical format, like 'Let's revisit the FCW!'; that would suck)
3. Other timelines, universe exploration, alternate universe. Just not the time for it imo. Lots more to do here for now.

[rapscallioness]

Sequel.