71 réponses à ce sujet

[DesioPL]

I heard the news, that next Mass Effect will be a sequel. And someone spoiled things about Marauders from ME3.

So... We can consider Refuse ending in ME3 as canonical? It's makes any sense? While refuse ending was added with EC.

[DesioPL]

StreetMagic wrote...

If it is, that would mean all of the species of this cycle have been wiped out and the next game is probably 50,000 years in the future where we play as evolved Pyjaks. Sounds lame.

I think the more possible option is, that we will se the last days of current cycle, where almost Asari, Turians, Krogans, Humans and other spieces are wiped out.

[KaiserShep]

Can't think of any grimmer a death to the franchise than this.

[ElSuperGecko]

Unlikely. Refuse was never even an option in the game as it originally shipped, so was clearly never part of Bioware's original "vision" for the endings.

Refuse being canonical in a sequel would mean every race we'd ever been introduced to would have been wiped out - including humanity. They'd have to rebuild the ME universe from scratch - new races, new population centres, new organisations, new political structures, new everything.

Unless of course they stage it AFTER Shepard's decision, but BEFORE the end of the Reaper war..

[SNascimento]

Not a chance.

[FlyingSquirrel]

I actually think a post-ME3 Refuse scenario could make for an interesting game with the current species. It could be centered around distributing the information from Liara's time capsule to various hidden worlds while making prothean-style final efforts to sabotage the next harvest. Shepard would have bled out on the Citadel, so the game would center around some combination of remaining Normandy survivors and people like Victus or Wrex.

I doubt that Bioware would do that if they're planning to keep Mass Effect as a viable long-term franchise, though - this scenario would only get one more game out of the series.

[Han Shot First]

There is zero chance of Refuse ever being carried over as canon in a sequel. For starters, unlike the other three endings it only exists in DLC. Not everyone who played the game knows it exists. Beyond that the problem with Refuse is that it ends with the Reapers winning and every space-faring civilization in the galaxy annihilated. If Bioware canonized a defeat for the Shepard trilogy, the fan rage would probably dwarf the ME3 ending controversy.

Also the Refuse ending only exists to debunk the Indoctrination Theory. Prior to the Extended Cut it was commonly said by the IT crowd, that the endings were an indoctrination attempt and Shepard should have an option to resist and refuse to play along. So Bioware gave Shepard the ability to resist and refuse...with disastrous results.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 04 décembre 2013 - 06:40 .

[ElSuperGecko]

Han Shot First wrote...
Also the Refuse ending only exists to debunk the Indoctrination Theory. Prior to the Extended Cut it was commonly said by the IT crowd, that the endings were an indoctrination attempt and Shepard should have an option to resist and refuse to play along. So Bioware gave Shepard the ability to resist and refuse...with disastrous results.

Wow.  Way to pull a strawman argument out of your ass, Han.

I've never, EVER seen an IT'er (pre OR post Extended Cut) talk about anything other than Destroy being the way to go.

Now Puzzle/Conventional Victory Theory, of course... that would be a different matter.

[AlanC9]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Wow.  Way to pull a strawman argument out of your ass, Han.

I've never, EVER seen an IT'er (pre OR post Extended Cut) talk about anything other than Destroy being the way to go.

Now Puzzle/Conventional Victory Theory, of course... that would be a different matter.

ITers favoring Refuse was fairly common immediately after the EC shipped, before the realities of Bio's DLC plan sank in. Though my impression is that it was always a minority faction.

[AlexMBrennan]

There is zero chance of Refuse ever being carried over as canon in a sequel. For starters, unlike the other three endings it only exists in DLC

Bioware has already done the exact same thing with Arrival...

[Really Sad Panther]

Bioware have always stated that they don't need to pick a canon ending for ME3, to make the next game. I'm not sure how they can do that, unless the next game is prequel or is taking place at the same time as Shepards story.

My opinion, which is worth exactly what you paid for it, is that destroy will be the canon ending.
With control and synthesis the reapers will still be around and their mandate will still be to preserve life. Which means they will be doing anything that will stop any large scale conflict from happening. Think of them as a galactic peace keeping force.

[ElSuperGecko]

AlanC9 wrote...
ITers favoring Refuse was fairly common immediately after the EC shipped, before the realities of Bio's DLC plan sank in. Though my impression is that it was always a minority faction.

Must have been a minority, as in myexperience the "Shepard Lives" breath scene was always integral to IT.

Refuse for me always amounted to people searching for a method of conventional victory - i.e. trust in the war assets we've acquired/are still acquiring through added content and DLC...

[xAmilli0n]

StreetMagic wrote...

If it is, that would mean all of the species of this cycle have been wiped out and the next game is probably 50,000 years in the future where we play as evolved Pyjaks. Sounds lame TOTALLY AWESOME.

Fixed that for you.

[ElSuperGecko]

StreetMagic wrote...
Those war assets don't mean anything except in relation to the Crucible staff and the armies protecting it. I don't think it was ever meant to signify an army for general purposes. It's all about how well designed the Crucible gets and how well protected it is (and how effective Hammer is in letting Shepard get through the beam run.. at least that's how Hammer was supposed to be in the original script). I think if we actually needed to build an army to literally fight the Reapers head to head, it'd probably be the equivalent of gathering 50,000 War Assets or something. Or hell, probably more.

Yeah, I know... but many were wondering (at the time) about why were kept recieving more war asets through DLC... wondering if we hit a tipping point, then maybe Refuse wouldn't so much of a ReFUse.

It was just an idea that was floating around while the DLC cycle was still ongoing.

[Killdren88]

KaiserShep wrote...

Can't think of any grimmer a death to the franchise than this.

Could be worse. Synthesis could be canon and we play as the villians assimalating people.

[SilJeff]

I treat the refusal ending like the shepard dies ending in ME2. Non-canon

[in it for the lolz]

DesioPL wrote...

I heard the news, that next Mass Effect will be a sequel. And someone spoiled things about Marauders from ME3.

So... We can consider Refuse ending in ME3 as canonical? It's makes any sense? While refuse ending was added with EC.

Sorry to burst your bubble but the news you heard is false. There has been no new intel about what the storyline is about in this new Mass Effect game.

[Darks1d3]

Killdren88 wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Can't think of any grimmer a death to the franchise than this.

Could be worse. Synthesis could be canon and we play as the villians assimalating people.

Can't really decide on which one would be worse. I think they're both about even as far as terrible ideas go for starting a new story.

[Han Shot First]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...
Also the Refuse ending only exists to debunk the Indoctrination Theory. Prior to the Extended Cut it was commonly said by the IT crowd, that the endings were an indoctrination attempt and Shepard should have an option to resist and refuse to play along. So Bioware gave Shepard the ability to resist and refuse...with disastrous results.

Wow.  Way to pull a strawman argument out of your ass, Han.

I've never, EVER seen an IT'er (pre OR post Extended Cut) talk about anything other than Destroy being the way to go.

Now Puzzle/Conventional Victory Theory, of course... that would be a different matter.

Prior to the EC there were plenty of ITers who were either A) campaigning for a 'refuse' option in DLC, or predicting that Bioware had one planned all along.

Whether or not they represented a majority of the IT crowd I can't say, but it wasn't an uncommon opinion.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 05 décembre 2013 - 04:08 .

[themikefest]

It would be interesting if the refuse ending is used for the nexr game and starts right after Shepard refuses the Catalyst.

You could have a game where everyone that can be alive in the next game or everyone that can be dead won't be in the next game. The only 3 that can't die at high ems but at low ems is edi, James and T'soni

I would let the robot and T'soni be killed and keep James alive with femshep, Joker, Samantha and Adams. The robot would lose its platform and just be the ship. We would need some new squadmates.