217 réponses à ce sujet

[Dark Gantros]

I think that if the sequel is just that, a sequel, they have to pick a ME3 ending and tweak it to fit the rebuilt (or not) universe. Using the Destroy ending as a base is the lesser of all evils because:

1.) The Reapers (and the Geth) are destroyed, creating a power vacuum to be filled by new antagonists.

2.) The Destroy ending forces the next game (if it's a true sequel) to take place a significant period of time (a generation at least) after the end of ME3 to allow for the infrastructure of the various surviving races to be rebuilt.

3.) Having such a significant period of time go by allows for few squadmates to have survived to the time of the sequel, with exceptions such as Wrex and Liara.

4.) Having the ability to decide which races ultimately survived to the sequel and potentially thrive allows for various stages to be redressed to reflect them.
For example, Wrex and the Krogan being cured can mean the appearance of Tuchanka could either be the ruins we are familiar with or a rapidly flourishing green paradise. This could have an effect on the behavior of the Krogan encountered as well. Same could be applied to Rannoch, which could be populated with Quarians and new proto-Geth (the latter would depend on whether you made peace between the two or not, otherwise just Quarians), and a silent, pristine, uninhabited city (the Geth restored Rannoch after they forced the Quarians out).

5.) Having the new main protagonist take an exam to make these choices is the best way (I can think of) to tailor your experience without breaking potential immersion.

...Or

The introduction of the new game basically is a version of the Indoctrination Theory and undoes the enter ME3 ending, freeing them to make it however they want. Probably the easiest move.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Who cares about what people cry about? Seriously.

BioWare is in no position to play the indifference card. There was heated backlash following DW2, enough it never managed to come close to the sales of its predecessors despite BioWare claiming how amazing it was. Then you have ME3's ending that sparked one of the largest gaming backlashes in the industry. BioWare has to trend carefully right now.

[dreamgazer]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

Who cares about what people cry about? Seriously.

BioWare is in no position to play the indifference card. There was heated backlash following DW2, enough it never managed to come close to the sales of its predecessors despite BioWare claiming how amazing it was. Then you have ME3's ending that sparked one of the largest gaming backlashes in the industry. BioWare has to trend carefully right now.

No, they need to make a few bold decisions about the universe if they're going to create a substantial sequel, not pussy-foot around the mental integrity of its fragile fanbase. 

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I like that choosing a canon ending is somehow damaging to the franchise.

In a franchise that stresses "no canon" you eman?

Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

There has always been a canon, and canonical options and paths through the variables. The story has always been within the scope of what the writers provided for, ie the canon, and has always operated under the direction of the writers. Not the players.

http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/


"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon"

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Seboist wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

iakus wrote...

Look at the crew roster in ME3 and tell me there were no cries of favoritism.
.

Still, I'd be careful about taking too much from that. If the complaining that went on these forums was an indication, when ME2 launched, I would have thought it was hated by every RPG fan in the galaxy.

RPG fans (ie not LARPers) don't consider ME2 anymore of an RPG than Gears of War or Doom(which are better games than it btw).

The ones who in the same breath talk about how great Baldur's Gate 1, the Gold Box, Fallout 1, etc are? I can't say I think much of their taste. But I'm glad to see you managed to become the voice of the RPG community.  

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:29 .

[Vigilant111]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I like that choosing a canon ending is somehow damaging to the franchise.

In a franchise that stresses "no canon" you eman?

Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

There has always been a canon, and canonical options and paths through the variables. The story has always been within the scope of what the writers provided for, ie the canon, and has always operated under the direction of the writers. Not the players.

http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/


"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon"

Haha,though I am impressed with your riposte but I must say what they are offering isn't really going to work due to limits on resources. For example, if Shepard dies in the Suicide Mission, the game prevents you from importing into ME3, so u cannot continue on with the story say, with another character

That said, I don't know anyone whom would keep a Shepard that dies in the Suicide Mission canon

Modifié par Vigilant111, 27 décembre 2013 - 01:52 .

[dreamgazer]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Seboist wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

iakus wrote...

Look at the crew roster in ME3 and tell me there were no cries of favoritism.
.

Still, I'd be careful about taking too much from that. If the complaining that went on these forums was an indication, when ME2 launched, I would have thought it was hated by every RPG fan in the galaxy.

RPG fans (ie not LARPers) don't consider ME2 anymore of an RPG than Gears of War or Doom(which are better games than it btw).

The ones who in the same breath talk about how great Baldur's Gate 1, the Gold Box, Fallout 1, etc are? I can't say I think much of their taste. But I'm glad to see you managed to become the voice of the RPG community.  

Well, despite the hardcore RPG community's overly harsh outlook on ME2 (he's right about 'em), the early Fallout games and the Baldur's Gate series are great.  

[LiL Reapur]

Lets hope ME4 isn't a another Aliens: Colonial Marines. If it is i will probably die in my sleep from the disappoint. But that's just me........

[Dean_the_Young]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I like that choosing a canon ending is somehow damaging to the franchise.

In a franchise that stresses "no canon" you eman?

Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

There has always been a canon, and canonical options and paths through the variables. The story has always been within the scope of what the writers provided for, ie the canon, and has always operated under the direction of the writers. Not the players.

http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/


"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon"

Perhaps you should quote the entire statement next time, Iakus. You know, to be less dishonest about the context.

The story setting will make it more difficult to die and makes the
action scenes easier, so players can mow through enemies, Hudson said.
The action mode fills in default dialogue that grants players access to a
lot of interesting things, but "it's not canon," Hudson said. "We have a
rule in our franchise that there is no canon."


You and I both know, and you've even admitted in the past, that there is a spectrum of canonical choices in the game. That there is no single canon path (such as the action mode auto-selections) does not mean there are not canon-compliant paths.


So, I'll ask you again- and feel free to find a quote that actually disproves any of these. A dev comment on the topic would be preferred, obviously, over one taken out of context of another topic.


Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human
N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a
multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide
Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and
indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

[Bourne Endeavor]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human
N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a
multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide
Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and
indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

This is rather disingenuous. The first two are events not at all influenced by the player, let alone to the extend the endings are. Neither will have potential ramifications and are, by extension, fluff. They do little more than establish Shepard, so yes, they are "canon" by technical definition, but once again, devoid of player input. The ending lacks this static narrative, thus cannot be viewed in the same light.

The remainder of those choices essentially states BioWare may resort to either scenario; a subversion of all prior details or canonising one of the endings. I suspect their original intent was the latter, with Synthesis their ending of choice, but fan reaction may have given them pause.

Regardless, the multi-racial Council and Cerberus getting a hold of tech are a blatant retcon and plot-hole respectively, if you opted for full renegade and paragon during those segments. I can't say I would fancy advocating poor writing as the solution. Mass Effect has enough of that already.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

dreamgazer wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Seboist wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

iakus wrote...

Look at the crew roster in ME3 and tell me there were no cries of favoritism.
.

Still, I'd be careful about taking too much from that. If the complaining that went on these forums was an indication, when ME2 launched, I would have thought it was hated by every RPG fan in the galaxy.

RPG fans (ie not LARPers) don't consider ME2 anymore of an RPG than Gears of War or Doom(which are better games than it btw).

The ones who in the same breath talk about how great Baldur's Gate 1, the Gold Box, Fallout 1, etc are? I can't say I think much of their taste. But I'm glad to see you managed to become the voice of the RPG community.  

Well, despite the hardcore RPG community's overly harsh outlook on ME2 (he's right about 'em), the early Fallout games and the Baldur's Gate series are great.  

And in the sequels' cases, I did enjoy them. But Baldur's Gate 1 and Fallout 1 are laughably bad, in my opinion.

[ubermensch007]

I think what would be interesting. What would possibly be the best direction for the next Mass Effect game to go in would be... Well let me put it this way, in the Mass Effect Trilogy the player was given the choice by way of Paragon or Renegade decisions to  play the part of either Good Cop or Bad Cop. We were also permitted to establish Commander Shepard's Background and Reputation as either a War Hero, Ruthless, Survivor, Earthborn, Spacer, or Colonist.

Whoever our protagonist is in the next Mass Effect I think BioWare would benefit  from making this game and story more of a Character Study of the Protagonist as opposed to going the Savior God rout they chose with Commander Shepard. The primary theme of the next Mass Effect should be this question:

Are you a war hero or warmonger? Because in a sense there is a fine line between either being one or the other. And having your allies and friends choosing to  side with and support your goals or attempt to sabotage your endeavors, could be very exciting and intriguing.  

I was watching Suits on USA on Demand earlier today and Ginna Torres character Jessica said something to Harvey that I won't soon forget: "I don't want you on my side. I want us on the same side." That right  there is the makings of a badass video game! I could see Commander Shepard or this new protagonist in the next Mass Effect game say something like this.

Modifié par ubermensch007, 27 décembre 2013 - 04:01 .

[shodiswe]

I'm looking forward to the Mass Effect 2.0 series.

I hope it will bring something good. I wouldn't be worried about 60$ and in sweden those games usualy endup costing 100$ or something for whatever reason...

But given the amount of cash I've trown at Star Citizen, which is far from being finnished, I wouldn't be concerned about paying some coffe change money for a game once it's finished. Unless ofcourse people would somehow convince me it's so terrible it would be unhealthy for me to get exposed to it.

The ME3 endgame was fairly dissapointing for a Mass Effect game. I still don't regret buying ME3, but, I wish that later part of the game had been slightly more polished and creative. I welcomed the EC and the closure it brought, though my thoughts on the endgame still remains.

Modifié par shodiswe, 27 décembre 2013 - 07:17 .

[Lunch Box1912]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Excited?  As of now, there is precisely nothing over which to be excited.  Hope is what the gods inflict on humans just before they drive them to madness.

Besides, no matter what Bioware creates for the new franchise, BSN will hate it.  

Even if it's the most revolutionary game ever created with mind-shattering ball-shrinking gameplay, Steve Blum as every character and turquoise asari ****** galore, with an ounce bottle of honest-to-ancestors quarian high fructose sweat in the CE to grab the Talihorde by the neck hairs and an inflatable Lawson doll, BSN will still hate-fvck it just out of toxic spite.  

Thanks to EA, MEWhatever will be an eighty dollar mediocre shooter "reimagining" that's essentially a six-hour SP tutorial for the dull MP with a fifteen dollar downloadable ending like Dead Space 3.  I say this only so that in some way Bioware might prove me wrong.  That dull-edged rattling and bruis'd hope is the only thing that comes close to excitement for me.

That being said, the Frostbite engine will at least make it pretty.  When your expectations are low, pretty can hold your hand until the cynical headache passes.

Now that I think of it, I am pretty excited that I'll be saving ninety-five bucks, so that's something.  

All works out in the end.

I share your pain. All I have for this game is hope, but even that is fading with time. 

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I like that choosing a canon ending is somehow damaging to the franchise.

In a franchise that stresses "no canon" you eman?

Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

There has always been a canon, and canonical options and paths through the variables. The story has always been within the scope of what the writers provided for, ie the canon, and has always operated under the direction of the writers. Not the players.

http://www.joystiq.c...ffer-you-a-cho/


"We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon"

Perhaps you should quote the entire statement next time, Iakus. You know, to be less dishonest about the context.

The story setting will make it more difficult to die and makes the
action scenes easier, so players can mow through enemies, Hudson said.
The action mode fills in default dialogue that grants players access to a
lot of interesting things, but "it's not canon," Hudson said. "We have a
rule in our franchise that there is no canon."


You and I both know, and you've even admitted in the past, that there is a spectrum of canonical choices in the game. That there is no single canon path (such as the action mode auto-selections) does not mean there are not canon-compliant paths.


So, I'll ask you again- and feel free to find a quote that actually disproves any of these. A dev comment on the topic would be preferred, obviously, over one taken out of context of another topic.


Since when has there been no canon? Has Shepard not always been a Human
N7 marine, and the first human spectre? Didn't we always end up with a
multi-racial council, Councilor Udina, and Shepard surviving the Suicide
Mission? Doesn't Cerberus always get their cybernetics and
indoctrination technology from the Collector Base?

The statement is entirely accurate, and you are being disingenuous in a way that would do Khalisah al-Jilani proud

There is no canon Shepard.  No chocie is canon.

Shepard can be male or female, paragon ro renegade or a combination fo the two.  No choice that we make in the game, from whom, if anyone, we choose to romance, kill, help, or what color we choose to paint the galaxy is canon.  


As Chris Priestly says: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/2507120/1#2507455

There is no canon Shepard.  There is no canon ending.  That has been one of the major selling points of the game.  At least it was.

If they canoniaze an ending, all that goes away.

[spirosz]

JakeMacDon wrote...

Excited?  As of now, there is precisely nothing over which to be excited.  Hope is what the gods inflict on humans just before they drive them to madness.

Besides, no matter what Bioware creates for the new franchise, BSN will hate it.  

Even if it's the most revolutionary game ever created with mind-shattering ball-shrinking gameplay, Steve Blum as every character and turquoise asari ****** galore, with an ounce bottle of honest-to-ancestors quarian high fructose sweat in the CE to grab the Talihorde by the neck hairs and an inflatable Lawson doll, BSN will still hate-fvck it just out of toxic spite.  

Thanks to EA, MEWhatever will be an eighty dollar mediocre shooter "reimagining" that's essentially a six-hour SP tutorial for the dull MP with a fifteen dollar downloadable ending like Dead Space 3.  I say this only so that in some way Bioware might prove me wrong.  That dull-edged rattling and bruis'd hope is the only thing that comes close to excitement for me.

That being said, the Frostbite engine will at least make it pretty.  When your expectations are low, pretty can hold your hand until the cynical headache passes.

Now that I think of it, I am pretty excited that I'll be saving ninety-five bucks, so that's something.  

All works out in the end.

Bahaha, good way to put it Jake.  Jackthough.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

iakus wrote...

As Chris Priestly says: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/2507120/1#2507455

There is no canon Shepard.  There is no canon ending.  That has been one of the major selling points of the game.  At least it was.

If they canoniaze an ending, all that goes away.

Yet your solution doesn't fix that. We can play around with terminology. We can say "Oh Bioware canonized this'. Or "Bioware says Mass Effect 4 takes place in an alternate universe".

But efforts at word play aside, your solution falls into the exact same trap. How is Bioware telling us "We're going to explore the Synthesis ending as an alternate universe" any different than Bioware saying "We're going to pretend the Reapers never existed as an alternate universe"?

"There is no canon" does not become a latch point for your arguments, unless you're proposing that ME4 is not made period?

[Iakus]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Yet your solution doesn't fix that. We can play around with terminology. We can say "Oh Bioware canonized this'. Or "Bioware says Mass Effect 4 takes place in an alternate universe".

But efforts at word play aside, your solution falls into the exact same trap. How is Bioware telling us "We're going to explore the Synthesis ending as an alternate universe" any different than Bioware saying "We're going to pretend the Reapers never existed as an alternate universe"?

"There is no canon" does not become a latch point for your arguments, unless you're proposing that ME4 is not made period?

Oh, believe me, a reboot would suite my needs just as well.

But in this particular example it's simple:  Synthesis is an achievable ending.  For some it won't be an alternate universe.  Reapers never existing is not.  By creating a Synthesis universe (at least, without including details impossible to achieve in a Green ending) You are saying this is the "right" choice for the audience to make.  Same with Destroy.  Same with Control.  Even with Refuse.  Exploring one means telling everyone else their ending isn't valid.


It's making Udina the Councilor no matter what, but on a far grander scale.

There is no way to totally circumvent the canon issue.  But by making a sequel a result of an ending that never happened, nobody's canon gets favored.  Everyone is free to create their own canon for Shepard's trilogy, and it's still valid for them.  Going forward is a completely new stroy where everyone gets to start fresh.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

iakus wrote...

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

Yet your solution doesn't fix that. We can play around with terminology. We can say "Oh Bioware canonized this'. Or "Bioware says Mass Effect 4 takes place in an alternate universe".

But efforts at word play aside, your solution falls into the exact same trap. How is Bioware telling us "We're going to explore the Synthesis ending as an alternate universe" any different than Bioware saying "We're going to pretend the Reapers never existed as an alternate universe"?

"There is no canon" does not become a latch point for your arguments, unless you're proposing that ME4 is not made period?

Oh, believe me, a reboot would suite my needs just as well.

But in this particular example it's simple:  Synthesis is an achievable ending.  For some it won't be an alternate universe.  Reapers never existing is not.  By creating a Synthesis universe (at least, without including details impossible to achieve in a Green ending) You are saying this is the "right" choice for the audience to make.  Same with Destroy.  Same with Control.  Even with Refuse.  Exploring one means telling everyone else their ending isn't valid.


It's making Udina the Councilor no matter what, but on a far grander scale.

There is no way to totally circumvent the canon issue.  But by making a sequel a result of an ending that never happened, nobody's canon gets favored.  Everyone is free to create their own canon for Shepard's trilogy, and it's still valid for them.  Going forward is a completely new stroy where everyone gets to start fresh.

You mean as opposed to telling everyone at the same time "your ending is not valid"?

That Bioware chooses a scenario that's impossible to achieve doesn't make it any less of a canon scenario. Since you're relying on Bioware's own statement in this matter, that's the relevant factor. If canon is going to be defined as "whatever universe Bioware establishes for ME4", then there only option is no ME4, based on your logic.

An alternate universe might lead to less fan rage, but that's a completely different argument from your use of Bioware's stance on canon.