75 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Nah... we can't end a thread with unquantifiable blather like "meaningful."

[Zinoviy]

Inquisitor Recon wrote...

No he should transform into the king of the archdemons. Then Hawke will show up and start cryign because he was the one who wanted to be a dragon.

Whoa, spoiler alert.

[Wayning_Star]

Time warp back to the day of dragons.

future tech vs. old (draconian) ways. (space magic vs. well, space magic

[Vrin]

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

This makes no sense to me. A sequel with a canon ending is a horrible idea. A sequel without one is worse. A sequel is a horrible idea.

[Wayning_Star]

If we go far enough forward in time, the past gets so lost that the facts are what we make of them.

Soooo.. the ME doesn't need any of the current aspects at all really. Same place different stuff and story.

[Karlone123]

An extra-galactic threat may be interesting, like the Yuuzhan Vong War in Star Wars.

[Wayning_Star]

well, they could bring back, or begin to provide that 'dark matter' matter. They never did explain where the resurrection technology came from, other than hint at prothean, because they got all the credit for the good stuff/tech. The main course idea has to be very big or it won't float the expected FLOTILLA ?

[AlanC9]

Vrin wrote...

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

I don't follow the argument. Setting a sequel in one version of the endings doesn't mean that version was the best future for the galaxy. It only means that future was the best future for a sequel. 

All that talk never really had a point in the first place, and anyone who felt gut-wrenching anger is a fool.

[Vrin]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vrin wrote...

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

I don't follow the argument. Setting a sequel in one version of the endings doesn't mean that version was the best future for the galaxy. It only means that future was the best future for a sequel. 

All that talk never really had a point in the first place, and anyone who felt gut-wrenching anger is a fool.

You're a writer for Bioware gettng KILLED for the ending of ME3.  The root of the anger?  The "non-ending".

All the vitriol they absorbed, the customers they pissed off who may not return...all because of you  - the Bioware writer's - choice to make the game end in a choice.  All the stuff they said afterword about how ME was all about choice and how they wanted choice to end the game etc...

That was all for nothing if they choose a canon ending (any of them).  

[Dean_the_Young]

If they accept a silly false delima concluding so.

Why should they?

[Wayning_Star]

actually there is a canon ending to ME3, but....

[Malanek]

Vrin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Vrin wrote...

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

I don't follow the argument. Setting a sequel in one version of the endings doesn't mean that version was the best future for the galaxy. It only means that future was the best future for a sequel. 

All that talk never really had a point in the first place, and anyone who felt gut-wrenching anger is a fool.

You're a writer for Bioware gettng KILLED for the ending of ME3.  The root of the anger?  The "non-ending".

All the vitriol they absorbed, the customers they pissed off who may not return...all because of you  - the Bioware writer's - choice to make the game end in a choice.  All the stuff they said afterword about how ME was all about choice and how they wanted choice to end the game etc...

That was all for nothing if they choose a canon ending (any of them).  

Completely and emphatically disagree. All its saying is the ending they chose to run with is one possible future.

Instead if they took all four endings (including refuse) and handwaved them into something similar enough to tell a single story from, that would be rendering the users choice null with no real consequences.

[Wayning_Star]

IF you think in billions of years, what 'difference' does difference actually make? It might matter to, say Leviathan, who actually live a long time because of their evolutionary ladder,etc.

[AlanC9]

Vrin wrote...
You're a writer for Bioware gettng KILLED for the ending of ME3.  The root of the anger?  The "non-ending".

All the vitriol they absorbed, the customers they pissed off who may not return...all because of you  - the Bioware writer's - choice to make the game end in a choice.  All the stuff they said afterword about how ME was all about choice and how they wanted choice to end the game etc...

That was all for nothing if they choose a canon ending (any of them).  

This sounds like a classic sunk-cost fallacy.

[GimmeDaGun]

AlanC9 wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

I was watching it, tell the dude said Control should be canonized.

So.....

www.youtube.com/watch

What's wrong with canonized Control?

Since both synthesis and control bring a new utopian or dystopian age it has no sense to continue the story of the galaxy to that direction. If you chose  one of those two options, then the reapers are still present and play a significant role in the life of the galaxy. Their presence and role as guardians would take all possibilities for the rise of a new and serious threat, conflict or problem. I think those two endings would be self-contained endings without any need of further story telling. Just like with ME2's ending if Shepard dies. 

That leaves us either destroy or refusal. Since refusal is more like an option to protest against the Catalyst and a prank from the developers part, it is highly improbable that they would carry on with the story and lore to that direction. Even if it would be an interesting scenario with full of story telling oportunities.

So if they canonize any of the endings, I think it will be destroy (most certainly mid to high ems, since low ems is another self-contained ending): it is an ending which gives you a blank slate, a fresh start if you like and also gives the developers the opportunity to import some of the biggest decisions (concerning the krogan, quarians, rachni, maybe council) to the new game (in PC). Destroy is a good starting point if you think about it. The reaper probelm is solved. The geth get destroyed. Cerberus is disbanded and annihilated. So all the "villians" of the first trilogy would be gone. The galaxy remain more or less intact. Earth, Palaven, Thessia, Surkesh are saved. The council races survived. 
You can easily treat the quarian question also: you either meet the remnants of their destroyed and scattered race or members of their flourishing society which live happily in thier reclaimed homeworld. It can be solved with different dialogue variations, since we will not visit Rannoch in the new game most probably. The krogan situation is the same. You either meet happy krogan, or not so happy krogan, or none at all, so they only get mentioned. 
As for the fate of Shepard and the rest of the Normandy crew. Most probably they will be mentioned as heroes and legends, but will not play any role in the new game. We won't know about their fate following the reaper-war, nor we would get any cameos. It would not be essencial, so it is completely ok. The new story should concentrate on itself, not on the prequel. 

So if I had to bet, I'd say they will go with a mid-high ems destroy option if they choose to make a direct sequel or a sequel which would take place in the distant future. 

[jamesp81]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vrin wrote...

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

I don't follow the argument. Setting a sequel in one version of the endings doesn't mean that version was the best future for the galaxy. It only means that future was the best future for a sequel. 

All that talk never really had a point in the first place, and anyone who felt gut-wrenching anger is a fool.

If BW is going to make a sequel, it's obvious one of the endings will get canonized.  If I had to choose, I'd pick Destroy obviously, because it leaves a better environment for story telling.  But given how much I disliked the ending in general, I'm not going to care if they pick another one.

Modifié par jamesp81, 23 janvier 2014 - 10:06 .

[PsyrenY]

My guess is that they will go with modified high-EMS destroy. The Geth are decimated but not totally wiped out, EDI may or may not be alive, and the Reapers are no longer a threat. (One or two may remain as a macguffin for later but that's about it.) Shepard is alive but no longer fit for duty. Timeskip a few decades, maybe a century, and show how the galaxy and council have changed.

AlanC9 wrote...

Vrin wrote...

That was all for nothing if they choose a canon ending (any of them).  

This sounds like a classic sunk-cost fallacy.

Spot-on, sir

[SwobyJ]

Well there's canon and there's 'canon'.

Canon = This happened exactly.

'Canon' = Sure, your choice happened, but...just..a...sec... ok! Now it's as though it was never picked!



On that, I'd say ..none of the endings. I don't have a lot to back me up here, but I have a feeling that any sequel or sequel-ish game would use most of what is in Destroy, some of what is in Control, and a bit of what is in Synthesis.

Vague, I know, sorry.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 23 janvier 2014 - 10:27 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Vrin wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Vrin wrote...

To all the people saying Synthesis, Control (or who would choose Destroy) to be canonized:

The root cause of the problems with the endings were Bioware didn't end the story. They left it up to the player to choose. That led to all the "this ending is better because..." problems (and Indoctrination Theory). All that talk, all that gut wrenching anger, all the debate (including all the debate about IT) is for waste if Bioware NOW chooses a canon ending.

I don't follow the argument. Setting a sequel in one version of the endings doesn't mean that version was the best future for the galaxy. It only means that future was the best future for a sequel. 

All that talk never really had a point in the first place, and anyone who felt gut-wrenching anger is a fool.

You're a writer for Bioware gettng KILLED for the ending of ME3.  The root of the anger?  The "non-ending".

All the vitriol they absorbed, the customers they pissed off who may not return...all because of you  - the Bioware writer's - choice to make the game end in a choice.  All the stuff they said afterword about how ME was all about choice and how they wanted choice to end the game etc...

That was all for nothing if they choose a canon ending (any of them).  

It is simple: Sweep the Colors Three under the rug like they never happened in the first place and replace it with a different ending that satisfies no one, but allows for continuity of the series: The Quarians blew up the Reapers. Daro'Xen vas Moreh was the hero of the Galaxy. We don't need to know how. It just happened. She pulled some miracle out of her ass and it worked. Shepard flies off into the sunset (with or without waifu -- use your headcanon) never to be seen or heard from again. That's all you need to know. :wizard: It's the solution to everything.

PS: If you don't like it, rage. 

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 23 janvier 2014 - 10:27 .

[Killdren88]

It clearly needs to the the Synthesis ending where we discover how to bridge between galaxies and go around a forcibly synthesize the beings. Pulling infants from their mothers so that they my be used for the next genetic smoothy for the Reapers while forcing people down as we give them their implants while saying " No need to struggle. You will soon find peace." While in the back they chant "For the greater good." While at the same time killing those who struggle too much saying "Silly organic beings. Your individuality and unique structure is the source of all chaos. You must join with us, or be exterminated."

[MegaIllusiveMan]

AlanC9 wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

I was watching it, tell the dude said Control should be canonized.

So.....

www.youtube.com/watch

What's wrong with canonized Control?

Uh... 'Cause they gave us an option to chose which one to do it?

Also, lots of people also picked Destroy... So yeah

[Argentoid]

Am I the only one around here who thinks that the next Mass Effect will take place in a parallel alternative universe or something?

Modifié par Argentoid, 23 janvier 2014 - 10:45 .

[Killdren88]

Argentoid wrote...

Am I the only one around here who thinks that the next Mass Effect will take place in a parallel alternative universe or something?

Most likely to avoid the ending completely.

[MegaIllusiveMan]

SwobyJ wrote...

Well there's canon and there's 'canon'.

Canon = This happened exactly.

'Canon' = Sure, your choice happened, but...just..a...sec... ok! Now it's as though it was never picked!



On that, I'd say ..none of the endings. I don't have a lot to back me up here, but I have a feeling that any sequel or sequel-ish game would use most of what is in Destroy, some of what is in Control, and a bit of what is in Synthesis.

Vague, I know, sorry.

Actually, I get your point...

For example, look at what they did with Revan on KotOR... You could chose Male or Female. Revan could romance Bastila/Carth, etc,etc.

Then, Uncle Karpyshin decided to cannonize revan(is that right? Cannonize?) making him Male, Romanced Bastila

Edit:

Argentoid wrote...

Am I the only one around here who thinks that the next Mass Effect will take place in a parallel alternative universe or something?

I'm not thinking anything 'till I get Bioware's plot Idea for the next Mass Effect

Modifié par MegaIllusiveMan, 23 janvier 2014 - 10:48 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

@ Argentoid: No you are not. Actually I'm hoping for that.