mass effect Days of Future Past? like what the next x men movie.
MASS EFFECT 4 General Discussion
Débuté par
Funkier_Than_Thou
, janv. 08 2014 06:21
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 09 janvier 2014 - 09:53
rapscallioness
-
- Members
- 8 039 messages
I just re found this post by Yanick Roy who's heading up the Next ME. Its from 11 months ago in thread abt why ME4 is not ME4. Lol! but yeah. I posted in another thread today, but thought it should be here too.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"gasp, i found it. it was 11 months ago. this is from yanick. take the post for what you will:
'Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway. smilie
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!' "
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"gasp, i found it. it was 11 months ago. this is from yanick. take the post for what you will:
'Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway. smilie
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!' "
Modifié par rapscallioness, 09 janvier 2014 - 09:54 .
#53
Posté 09 janvier 2014 - 10:01
laudable11
-
- Members
- 1 171 messages
Reboot. Dont be surprised if this happens.
#54
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 12:36
Funkier_Than_Thou
-
- Members
- 33 messages
I just find the lack of news from Bioware about the new game distressing. I hope they don't screw up the Mass Effect Universe with their new story. It could be that the next story might be very controversial almost as much or more so than the canon endings of Mass Effect 3. Maybe they're nervous with the direction they're taking the series and doesn't want to risk alienating their fans anymore than they already have hence the silent treatment.
Like I said... distressing.
They better deliver is all I'm saying...
Like I said... distressing.
They better deliver is all I'm saying...
#55
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 01:54
sr2josh
-
- Members
- 960 messages
eluvianix wrote...
Wrong forum, dude.
There isn't a correct forum yet either.
#56
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 01:54
sr2josh
-
- Members
- 960 messages
laudable11 wrote...
Reboot. Dont be surprised if this happens.
I would actually be open to this.
#57
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 01:55
MrMrPendragon
-
- Members
- 1 445 messages
Makai81 wrote...
eluvianix wrote...
Wrong forum, dude.
There isn't a correct forum yet either.
It's in limbo...
#58
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 02:02
Malanek
-
- Members
- 7 838 messages
Funkier_Than_Thou wrote...
Sequel Possibility:
The Mass Effect Universe is huge. Infinite possibilities. However, the story can't be a sequel because the three endings, whether you like it or not, severely set a limit to the story that can be written after. If the Mass Effect Universe is the Ocean the Mass Effect 3 ending practically says that the next story will be in a pond.
How does setting next ME in a post destroy storyline limit the story? I can't see how you can even approach this conclusion.
As an aside, limitations are not neccessarily bad, sometimes they can inspire direction and creativity.
#59
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 03:20
Soccer FeverMan
-
- Members
- 483 messages
No, I'll give this to Bioware they can make interesting predicaments the political dynamics they created in the mass effect universe is to be lauded in my opinion, they bring valid points on what would happen if humanity were to reach the stars and be on par with species they would have thought to be far beyond them. And that's the crux of it (for me anyways) I liked the situation they created in the world not the story itself i could give two sh*ts about any of the characters except for my Shepard, they all could have died but I would've been unfased. But mass effect 2 was sh*t made no connection with the previous game, mass effect 3 was well....you know.chris2365 wrote...
Soccer FeverMan wrote...
HA!Funkier_Than_Thou wrote...
I am not underestimating the talents at bioware. They are all great writers and very talented storytellers.
Think of it this way: Bioware may have screwed up in it's fanbase's eyes, but there wouldn't have been such a massive outrage if the fans didn't care about the story and it's characters. Making us care about the end of the story requires good writing, and I think Bioware generally (no one's perfect) had to have excellent writing in all 3 games to make us react like we did.
I'm not one of the drones that's infinetely pissed about the ending. I was upset at how they sh*tted on my choices look at my avatar that should give you a gauge of how pissed i was. I would have preffered they didn't expand ceberus like they did in ME2, but what are you going to do.
The writing was okay not excellent for what they presented to us, really think about ME2 and how it connects to ME, think about what the purpose of killing Shepard was...that is not excellent writing and that it is one of a bunch of hiccups.
#60
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 08:55
Balkazar246
-
- Members
- 3 messages
I personally hope they sent us back when the Protheans were fighting off the Reapers so we have a choice of how that story ends as all we knowso far is that they lost the war but wouldnt it be fun to make choices to where we have an effect on the past?
Also I would consider doing a Campaign with Krogan, Quarian or Salarian has a Hero
Also I would consider doing a Campaign with Krogan, Quarian or Salarian has a Hero
#61
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 09:07
chris2365
-
- Members
- 2 048 messages
Soccer FeverMan wrote...
No, I'll give this to Bioware they can make interesting predicaments the political dynamics they created in the mass effect universe is to be lauded in my opinion, they bring valid points on what would happen if humanity were to reach the stars and be on par with species they would have thought to be far beyond them. And that's the crux of it (for me anyways) I liked the situation they created in the world not the story itself i could give two sh*ts about any of the characters except for my Shepard, they all could have died but I would've been unfased. But mass effect 2 was sh*t made no connection with the previous game, mass effect 3 was well....you know.chris2365 wrote...
Soccer FeverMan wrote...
HA!Funkier_Than_Thou wrote...
I am not underestimating the talents at bioware. They are all great writers and very talented storytellers.
Think of it this way: Bioware may have screwed up in it's fanbase's eyes, but there wouldn't have been such a massive outrage if the fans didn't care about the story and it's characters. Making us care about the end of the story requires good writing, and I think Bioware generally (no one's perfect) had to have excellent writing in all 3 games to make us react like we did.
I'm not one of the drones that's infinetely pissed about the ending. I was upset at how they sh*tted on my choices look at my avatar that should give you a gauge of how pissed i was. I would have preffered they didn't expand ceberus like they did in ME2, but what are you going to do.
The writing was okay not excellent for what they presented to us, really think about ME2 and how it connects to ME, think about what the purpose of killing Shepard was...that is not excellent writing and that it is one of a bunch of hiccups.
Fair point, we each have our preferences in terms of what worked and didn't work in the writing departement. Some people found the plot of ME2 worthless, and I understand their point of view. I personally enjoyed most of the writing across the trilogy, but we can both agree that Bioware did present us with a universe filled with oppertunities thanks to all the races, politics, etc.
Barring anything affecting the ending, they managed to create a universe that has good story possibilities. A cold war between the humans and batarians, a salarian special ops team, etc. What I'm saying, is that it takes a decent amount of writing standard to be able to explore the universe in so many different ways, to be able to foresee future possibilities in this universe, etc.
#62
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 09:14
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 114 messages
rapscallioness wrote...
I just re found this post by Yanick Roy who's heading up the Next ME. Its from 11 months ago in thread abt why ME4 is not ME4. Lol! but yeah. I posted in another thread today, but thought it should be here too.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"gasp, i found it. it was 11 months ago. this is from yanick. take the post for what you will:
'Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway. smilie
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!' "
The WW1-WW2 metaphor is interesting and seems to suggest a fresh cast. I guess the proof in the pudding is how they handle the highwire between the old and the new.
#63
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 09:34
Finlandiaprkl
-
- Members
- 306 messages
wright1978 wrote...
rapscallioness wrote...
I just re found this post by Yanick Roy who's heading up the Next ME. Its from 11 months ago in thread abt why ME4 is not ME4. Lol! but yeah. I posted in another thread today, but thought it should be here too.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"gasp, i found it. it was 11 months ago. this is from yanick. take the post for what you will:
'Hi guys,
It’s my first time posting on the forums, so I hope I’m going to do it right!
What Chris is saying is that thinking of the next Mass Effect game as Mass Effect 4 would imply a certain linearity, a straight evolution of the gameplay and story of the first three games. But because we are switching to a new engine and need to rebuild a bunch of game systems, we have an opportunity to rethink how we want these systems to be going forward instead of just inheriting them from the previous games. Story-wise, the arc of the first trilogy has also been concluded, and what we will do is tell a new story set in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn’t mean that events of the first three games and the choices you made won’t get recognized, but they likely won’t be what this new story will focus on.
In other words, because the game takes place before of after the first trilogy does not mean it necessarily is a straight prequel or sequel.
I’m not a big fan of analogies because the images you use always mean something different to different people, so they are inherently flawed. But let me use one anyway. smilie
If you had three games centered around a group of key soldiers in the US army during World War I and then decided to make a game about another group of people during the second World War, the games could have many points in common and feel true to one another, and you likely would have to recognize how the events of the first war influenced the ones of the second, but you would not necessarily think of it as a sequel. Again, the analogy is not great, but what I’m trying to say is that the ME universe is so rich that we are not limited to a single track when coming up with a new story.
I apologize for being cryptic right now, but it’s early enough in development that we don’t have much to share – things still fluctuate quite a bit. As I have posted on Twitter though, the overall feeling of what you are discussing and asking for is very much aligned with what the team intends on delivering, and that makes me feel very good about where we’re heading!
I hope this helps clarify why we’re not thinking of the next ME game as ME4 internally!' "
The WW1-WW2 metaphor is interesting and seems to suggest a fresh cast. I guess the proof in the pudding is how they handle the highwire between the old and the new.
So...What? We get Reaper War II?
#64
Posté 10 janvier 2014 - 09:53
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 114 messages
Finlandiaprkl wrote...
wright1978 wrote...
The WW1-WW2 metaphor is interesting and seems to suggest a fresh cast. I guess the proof in the pudding is how they handle the highwire between the old and the new.
So...What? We get Reaper War II?
If you take the analogy literally, a generation later a new non reaper threat emerges that has to be stopped.
#65
Posté 11 janvier 2014 - 02:25
Sion1138
-
- Members
- 1 159 messages
wright1978 wrote...
If you take the analogy literally, a generation later a new non reaper threat emerges that has to be stopped.
If it's after, it's a sequel. No buts.
#66
Posté 11 janvier 2014 - 03:45
SilJeff
-
- Members
- 901 messages
I guess the mass effect equivalent to Reaper War 2 would be the inevitable war against the Leviathans
#67
Posté 11 janvier 2014 - 10:12
Finlandiaprkl
-
- Members
- 306 messages
Can't be. Leviathans are severly outnumbered, and their mind-control techniques are extremely limited, considering an all-out galactic war.SilJeff wrote...
I guess the mass effect equivalent to Reaper War 2 would be the inevitable war against the Leviathans
#68
Posté 11 janvier 2014 - 03:11
Nasragl
-
- Members
- 4 messages
Curious the prothean survived, if only by luck. What if others did to, others who sacrificed there own races to survive. Who have waited and see a galaxy torn apart by war and a chance to take power.
So what if it set 40 to 60 years down the line and the rebuild has not gone so well. The odd civil war or two has happened...I'd want to more darker 'Shepherd' maybe an ex n7. That and a not so clear cut galaxy.
So what if it set 40 to 60 years down the line and the rebuild has not gone so well. The odd civil war or two has happened...I'd want to more darker 'Shepherd' maybe an ex n7. That and a not so clear cut galaxy.
#70
Posté 11 janvier 2014 - 11:59
DoomsdayDevice
-
- Members
- 2 354 messages
I have no freaking clue what they could possibly do with the next game.
Still, even after playing all the DLC, my ME3 still ends with "It's getting late, but okay... One more story." (about "the Shepard") I'm still not sure what that's supposed to mean.
Still, even after playing all the DLC, my ME3 still ends with "It's getting late, but okay... One more story." (about "the Shepard") I'm still not sure what that's supposed to mean.
#71
Posté 12 janvier 2014 - 03:01
liggy002
-
- Members
- 5 337 messages
DoomsdayDevice wrote...
I have no freaking clue what they could possibly do with the next game.
Still, even after playing all the DLC, my ME3 still ends with "It's getting late, but okay... One more story." (about "the Shepard") I'm still not sure what that's supposed to mean.
It means "Buy DLC for Mass Effect 3."
#72
Posté 12 janvier 2014 - 03:02
liggy002
-
- Members
- 5 337 messages
laudable11 wrote...
Reboot. Dont be surprised if this happens.
I could be wrong but this is what I think it will be. They will wash their hands of the original trilogy in doing so.
#73
Posté 12 janvier 2014 - 03:10
liggy002
-
- Members
- 5 337 messages
Psychevore wrote...
Refuse ending will be 'canon'.
Humans tried doing what the Protheans did, but actually succeed... a little. 3 humans surive their stasis pods and try to prevent the inevitable.
Instead of having to deal with a reluctant council, now you get to deal with reluctant, hostile and scared alien races you've never seen before, and you get to tell them a story they simply can't believe. So your first quest is:
Find one of Liara's capsules.
Holy crap, I just made a game.
Refuse could not be canon because they don't want Shepard 2.0. Sure, they could start it off without Shepard but then wouldn't it be odd to just have him die off screen and then continue the Refuse events?
Perhaps you could be the survivor (not related to Shepard's crew or anyone they knew) who warns the next cycle, but then the Reapers would be the bad guys. I highly doubt this because EA wants to start fresh on a new trilogy. I would love for it to happen but I know it wont happen.
#74
Posté 12 janvier 2014 - 03:14
KaiserShep
-
- Members
- 23 806 messages
Going forward in time far enough that the galaxy is largely rebuilt is essentially the same as a reboot, without the pesky annoyances of one. You don't have to have people going on about "hey, remember those reapers?" and you can introduce new plot threads and social issues at the same time. Rebooting the entire franchise from the ground up sounds more problematic than simply going into the future, because it puts a hard reset on both the good and the bad things about the series. F*ck the genophage, batarian/human rivalry, the rachni wars, etc.. I want the galaxy to be more advanced. I want it to move on to something else, not have the timeline go in reverse only to have the setting totally restructured.
Modifié par KaiserShep, 12 janvier 2014 - 03:15 .
#75
Posté 12 janvier 2014 - 03:24
travmonster
-
- Members
- 104 messages
I have no idea what the next Mass Effect will be like, but I'm excited for it and eager for some more information to drip our way. I'm looking forward to when it gets its own forum (like DAI has now) along with an official title.
I do hope they go with a sequel. I'm sure I would enjoy a prequel, but as others have stated, I want things to move *forward* rather than backward. For example, I enjoyed some of Star Trek: Enterprise, and the new prequel Star Trek movies are pretty good, but I feel like the franchise has stagnated--always looking backward and referencing itself, rather than moving into the future. Star Trek needs a "Next-Next Generation" type of renaissance. I think Bioware would be wise to move Mass Effect into its next generation as well, rather than going back.
I do hope they go with a sequel. I'm sure I would enjoy a prequel, but as others have stated, I want things to move *forward* rather than backward. For example, I enjoyed some of Star Trek: Enterprise, and the new prequel Star Trek movies are pretty good, but I feel like the franchise has stagnated--always looking backward and referencing itself, rather than moving into the future. Star Trek needs a "Next-Next Generation" type of renaissance. I think Bioware would be wise to move Mass Effect into its next generation as well, rather than going back.
