106 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

I could see N7-aliens working in a few ways.

First is the multiplayer element carrying forward, and nothing more. N7 remains the popular moniker for the group of teams that do alliance special ops, even when it uses aliens. Said moniker is unofficial, but a part of popular culture since the legends of its success through the Reaper War.


Carrying that forward, you could embellish the backstory so that when the Crucible destroyed the relays, the N7 teams across the galaxy reformed into localized, multiracial groups of special forces/mercenaries. These groups, surviving in parallel across the galaxy, kept the same name and reputation are the public legacy of N7. While they all trace their roots back to Alliance N7s and the Reaper War, they have effectively become separate groups that share a common name. No common standard of quality or agenda unites them.


Carrying that 'evolved into localized merc groups' bit forward: the Reaper War N7 groups survived the destruction of the relays by using personal connections and becoming an alliance of merc group. Veterans of the Reaper War N7s would meet eachother as slow FTL reconnected the galaxy, creating an old-boy's network of contacts and references across the galaxy. These became the core of a loose alliance of N7 groups, sort of an elite mercenary guild, that goes by N7. Each localized sector might have its own N7 group, and while not formally unified any N7 member traveling the slow-FTL routes can find some support with the local N7 affiliates.


For a more formalized alternative: have the post-Destroy Alliance successor(s) transition from a pure-Human state to one with integrated alien minorities. Say some of those alien allies decide/are unable to return home from Earth, and settle in the area. The Alliance successor becomes multi-racial enough to have its own aliens in the special forces.

[Saikyo_McRyu]

1. Sequel

2. Training department. Didn't really have a good appreciation of what N7 was in-game until the conversation about it with James in ME3. I'm not interested in the protagonist being another N7 human, though.

3. Vorcha and elcor.

Both of these are great NPCs - not sure if they would be much fun to play as. Some player characters just don't fit in, such as G0-T0 in KOTOR 2. Droids are cool and all, but I already had HK and T3. Never wanted to have that bowling ball in my party.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

1) Prequel or midquel set close to ME1

2) Both out-of-game and in-game, a brand and logo and I am starting to get sick of due to its constant over-exposurer and overshadowing of cooler elements that actually had more story relevance such as the spectres (which also had a pretty cool logo BTW).

3) I am not a huge fan of cutting out species, but if I had to pick then the Drell because all their characters have been complete **** so far. Is it okay if the second is the "Humanity is special" shtick?

[GimmeDaGun]

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

How would BSN answer the questions asked in the so called biowares closed group meetings!

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe. [sequel; overwhelming]

2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

1. Even if I'd love to see a spin-off (story oriented third person shooter) for the First Contact War and the Skyllian Blitz, I think it should be either a sequel (in the distant future) or an alternate universe (if it means travelling to another galaxy or discovering a world of unopened relays). 

2. N7? It means Alliance elite soldieres\\operatives. Gifted soldiers who recieved the highest level of training possible and poved their prowess and capabilities in high risk operations or critical situations. Anderson was N7, Kai Leng was N7, Shepard was N7 and even Vega got promoted to the level of N7. I do not associate it with Shepard, I associate with the Alliance military.

3. Which two races would I get rid of? I wouldn't get rid of any of them, but if it's a sequel the logical choices would be either the geth or the quarians, the krogan, the rachni, since it's them who can be extinguished in the original trilogy. If it was up to me, I'd say I would not miss the drell and the geth. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 23 janvier 2014 - 11:20 .

[SwobyJ]

1) I want to at least know and involve myself in 'sequel-y' happenings. This doesn't mean the whole game has to take place 'after' ME3. I'm up for several normal-to-scificrazy reasonings to have 'current' and 'past' events happen too. I'm up for alternative forms of storytelling.
But yes, I want an 'AFTER'. Not an exclusively First Contact War game or whatever else. It has to tie into the 'AFTER ME3' element.
Space magic be damned
When it comes to Alternate Universe, again, I'm ok with a version of that. But again, unlike some here on BSN it seems, I think it cannot disregard the endings of ME3.


2) N7 means Shepard. That's how Mass Effect has shown it so far. What, would it mean Vega? No, because Vega was directly influenced by Shepard on all that. Would it mean special forces only? No, because the only groups we see that might be N7 are part of a war revolving much around Shepard.

It's tied to him, fundamentally. Whatever we see of 'N7', needs to at least, at minimummmm, reference Shepard. Before Shepard, N7 was just another military designation of an Alliance.


3) Cut whoever has the least involvement with the main story of the next game, duh.
But really, I can't think of any. I'll go through and say why:

Humans - Duh, no.
Asari - Nope, not happening.
Turians - Would revolt.
Salarians - Slightly tempting, but I'd rather they actually be investigated even more than ever.

Krogan - No way. I don't even like em much, but I think they should always play even at least a MINOR role (I'm ok with not seeing Tuchanka, even if only for now)
Quarians - While I'm alright with this, I think it sends a terrible message. Many people love the quarians, and even if Tali isn't in the next game, losing them kind ruins the whole 'organic and synthetic' deal that was pushed towards the ending of the trilogy. A 'what was the point then?' thing
Geth - Personal favs of mine and if they were removed or replaced I would in fact revolt

Volus - In a way I'd say yes. However, I have a feeling the volus, or at least some of them, are headed for great things in the next game anyway..
Elcor - Never! Does Bioware know how much love people have for them and their silly voices by now??!? If anything, give em cannons and put them in my squad (of course with a combat system that would account for an elcor better than ME1-3)
Hanar - Personally don't care much for them in themselves, but I have a real wish for seeing Kahje
Drell - I'd be OK with losing them. However, heck, I WILL say that if there was a protagonist species option, one of my first characters to make would be a male.. or even potentially a female drell. I have no dislike for them - I just realize their CURRENTLY secondary role to the MEU, at least so far.

Vorcha - I might go for this one. However, I'd rather Bioware take the chance and even take us to their planet to do something. Considering that they're kinda 'the galaxy's cockroaches', I'd rather they always survive through the series.
Batarians - Part of me says yes, but damn, that one entry that hints of how if the Batarians make it through this war, they might have a great society... I want to see that, really. I don't want them pushed aside.

Rachni - Find something useful to do with them or toss em. No half measures again with them. Personally, I love the rachni concept and only want an evolution of them, but it doesn't need to be in the next game per say. Just acknowledgement.
Yahg - Would be a waste of ME2-ME3's 'teasing' of them not to have at least one/a few of them play a role...
Obviously, we don't need to play a yahg, but having them in the story? IMO we better.

Collectors - Is Harbinger here? Reapers? If so, yes, we need em. If not, then I guess they're dropped.

Raloi - I'd hope they're not abandoned but I'd be okay if they were.
Virtual Aliens - WTF is with that?


Result: I guess the ones at the top of the list in no particular order are Raloi (if they count), Collectors (if they count), Rachni, Vorcha, Drell, Volus, Hanar.

But really, I'm looking at it from a more limited POV, the trilogy POV. Honestly, I don't want any gone. I want the good ones to have continuing stories (but oh yes, I'd be alright with a lower focus on the 'Council' species), and the more secondary/worse ones to have a real push in importance to the story. Flesh out the world, instead of cutting off parts of it.

[SwobyJ]

Oh and I want to repeat the notion that species that have been 'covered' before with story focus, don't necessarily need to have that focus in the next game. Examples:

-ME1 focused on the Council Species and Humanity. Since the trilogy has a Human focus, that stuff stays throughout, but for the Council stuff, we really only heavily involved ourselves in Asari territory in ME2. The other two species were mostly mercs (mostly). That's an example of Bioware picking part of what they had before and carrying it on, but not everything.

-ME2 then has the underworld (Terminus) and its related species. It also brings the Quarian, Geth, and Krogan worlds more into focus, while diminishing most Council stuff (except Asari).

-ME3 brings a more 'rounded' view of things. We get some Council worlds, and some secondary species worlds, and Earth. What we lose, is the underworld (unless we get the Omega DLC) focus. However, with each game, we're still getting a 'larger' view of the Mass Effect galaxy, even if it comes in different forms (special agent, undercover agent, war story).


So what would I want with 'ME4'?

-Explorations of Council species worlds, but only a strong focus on one of them. I'm rooting for Palaven or Sur'Kesh and/or their associated worlds. Thessia imo should come later, especially if we get a new trilogy.

-Quarian, Geth, and Krogan stuff still exist, but no longer with the main storyline focus so much on them (aka ME3 is the most focus they'll ever get). Still cause-and-effect based on choices (imo we should have it), but localize it whenever possible. Just as ME2 mostly pushed away the Citadel stuff, and ME3 mostly pushed away the Terminus stuff, ME4 should mostly push away the Krogan/Geth/Quarian stuff, maybe to be part of later DLC/expansions instead of a main game and storyline. I still WANT em, heck, I want the species playable!!! (hehe), but they don't need to matter as much AS before, RELATIVE to main plot and game design.

-imo side species should gain more prominence, if not story focus. In a 'new' galaxy (potentially), species like the volus could play a big emerging role, and I'd rather they have that then become species that 'Bioware forgot'
I'll happily sacrifice not going on Rannoch and Tuchanka again if it means I can get an even wider (yet in ways intimate) view of the MEU than before.


EDIT: Oh yeah, and
1) Geth should be done with as a main enemy faction. Not that I don't even want to fight em, but if Bioware can make similar enemies and then just reskin them as Geth for certain story bits/choice results, I'd roll with that, for example. I think we're past having them as prominent auto-story enemies. If anything, I want to have full choice whether I'm even facing against them.
2)Eh.. maybe just me, but I don't like to think of the Reapers as done. Even taking the trilogy totally literally, we got Reaper corpses all over the place. I'd... have to be sold VERY hard on the idea of every single Reaper intelligence and coding to be gone (aside from Geth upgrades), and that's even just in Destroy!
Should they be the largest, overwhelming enemy? I think not. However, I'd accept them even being up to 1/3 of the problems we face. Just throw in some other enemy factions, an at least largely unrelated antagonist, and other stuff, to make the 'Reapers' as a whole less of a primary enemy

Modifié par SwobyJ, 23 janvier 2014 - 01:18 .

[Chashan]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

3. Which two races would I get rid of? I wouldn't get rid of any of
them, but if it's a sequel the logical choices would be either the geth
or the quarians, the krogan, the rachni, since it's them who can be
extinguished in the original trilogy. If it was up to me, I'd say I
would not miss the drell and the geth.

That may be so, yet think of how the Rachni-decision turned out...if BW want the bugs back as critters to zerg the PC and crew, they may very well just go ahead with that irregardless.
And the good ol' Krogan are hardy and by the time of ME3 still got high numbers. I'll get around to that again later.

Anyhow...

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe.

As is, BW still got their backdoor to a sequel, what with framing ME1-3 as a myth-type of thing. So I would not mind that blurred approach when it comes to the "Shepard"-arc at all, as it would get rid of a necessity to keep dragging on import-data from the trilogy. A clean start, so to speak.
BW could of course also just reboot the series all the way to the beginning of ME1 or that of ME2, discarding the rather problematic Reaper-plot entirely. Not hard to do, really: in the latter case, the things are simply stuck in transit-limbo, having no way of reaching the galaxy on their own two feet any time soon after Sovereign being prwned.

Artifex_Imperius wrote...
2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

They got nothing on the Special Interventions Unit.

Just a designation for Navy SEALS/Spetsnaz/plain spec-ops in speehz. Never did associate anything more with it, and I would not mind if other space-faring nations' specialists got some limelight, for a change. So far it's merely been SpecTRe this, N7 that...

Artifex_Imperius wrote...
3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you
having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their
answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be
what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz
no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

Quarians and geth. Quarians are very low in numbers - 16 million isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to the galaxy-wide population - and both are very isolated, hence skipping both entirely would not be hard at all. Other races, such as Krogan, are higher in number and/or far more wide-spread.
And when it comes to the Krogan: only because a lone Urdnot whines about how their people are "dying" does not make that true. The Krogan have made do with the Genophage for a couple generations as of ME3 and are still yet present in the galaxy. If any race can keep on going despite that, it's these ol' grumpy dinosaurs.

Modifié par Chashan, 23 janvier 2014 - 01:17 .

[Iakus]

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

How would BSN answer the questions asked in the so called biowares closed group meetings!

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe. [sequel; overwhelming]

Alternate Universe.  I have no interest in visiting a universe where RGB happened

2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

Well, it means Systems Alliance special forces.  But I guess to me it ended up meaning COmmander Shepard's superhero insignia.  Like Superman's "S" symbol

3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

Asari and turians I guess.  They're the only races pretty much guaranteed to help in ME3 and like I said I have no interest in canonizing ME3's endings.

[Dean_the_Young]

How does that last part make any sense?

[MattFini]

1) Sequel

2) Not much beyond my association with Shepard

3) Hopefully no races are gone entirely, but I could do without the Elcor and Hanar


I get the impression these questions are all for marketing purposes, ie- how they'll push MENext out to the fans. For example, if they made a sequel, and the majority of fans seem to want one, that will be a big focus of their marketing.

Conversely, if the N7 insignia means very little to the fans beyond Shepard, it won't be stamped all over the collector's editions, etc.  

Modifié par MattFini, 23 janvier 2014 - 02:35 .

[GimmeDaGun]

iakus wrote...

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

How would BSN answer the questions asked in the so called biowares closed group meetings!

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe. [sequel; overwhelming]

Alternate Universe.  I have no interest in visiting a universe where RGB happened

2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

Well, it means Systems Alliance special forces.  But I guess to me it ended up meaning COmmander Shepard's superhero insignia.  Like Superman's "S" symbol

3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

Asari and turians I guess.  They're the only races pretty much guaranteed to help in ME3 and like I said I have no interest in canonizing ME3's endings.

The Turians and the Asari? Come on man! They are a fundamental part of the universe! You should not associate everything with your endless disdain of the trilogy's ending. When it comes to your opinion about pretty much anything concerning the ME universe, somehow it is always related to the ending. I just don't get the amount of grudge you hold to something you happen not to like.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want offend you, but I think you (and a few others) take this whole ending issue way more serious than it should be taken. It's what it is. You have mehem, enjoy it, but rebooting the whole universe just because you did not like one aspect of the game is a bit over the top for me. 

I did not like some aspects of the trilogy myself, like the cheesy and constant kissing up to Shepard from every characters part, and I just hate the juvenile power-trip fantasy aspects of it, but I can live with them. If I had a chance to direct the trilogy I can guarantee you that you would get lot darker and more philosophical, mistery oriented, sci-fi horror style hardcore investigation-war story than what we got and you would not be able to play it through without serious sacrafices and getting your main character's hands dirty. You would get more ending options (4 or 5), but each of them would have its share of moral ambiguity and mercilesness. The game is not like that, yet I do not hate it or complain all the time.

Just an example. I'm a hardcore Tolkien fan. A much bigger fan of his writing than of the ME-trilogy. I was 7 years old when I read The Hobbit, I was 11 (that was 18 years ago) when I read the TLOTR-trilogy. Ever since I have re-read those books in every two or three years and of course I read all the other Tolkien books as well. I just love Tolkien.
When Peter Jackson decided to create a film-trilogy I was thrilled as hell. The trilogy came out and I enjoyed it despite the obvious changes. Some of them I liked, some of them I did not. They are far from being perfect, but they are good films and are mostly true to the spirit of Tolkien's writing.
Ten years later we get The Hobbit trilogy. I was not happy when I heard that they were going for a trilogy with such a short book. Two films? Great! Three films? I smell milk here... The first film came out, and while it was certainly not TLOTR, it was still a good movie which I liked a lot. A year later comes The Desolation of Smaug... the complete hollywoodisation of Tolkien and totally new level of cheese, sloppy writing, editing and video-gamey moments on the silver-screen. Ok, maybe not as bad as Pacific Rim and the likes of it were, but still. While the film had great Tolkien moments was a complete waste of money and effort and took way too much liberty and straied too far away from the written word and the spirit of the book. In one word: I dislike it a lot. To me, it is like the ending of ME3's ending to you. And guess what. I walked out of the cinema and haven't cared about the film ever since. I will give it another shot when the director's cut comes out, but until then I don't care about it and I would certainly not rage about it. 

[Lawrence0294]

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

How would BSN answer the questions asked in the so called biowares closed group meetings!

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe. [sequel; overwhelming]

2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

1) Prequel

2) Just a military statues to me

3) Drell and Vorcha

[Gethrian]

1) Sequel. I just maybe could accept AU if it comes to it but it would depend on many things.
2) Best of the Best from Alliance
3) I wouldn't want any race gone except Reapers and perhaps Leviathans

[DoomsdayDevice]

1. Sequel
2. Shepard
3. Drell, Volus

[Iakus]

GimmeDaGun wrote...


The Turians and the Asari? Come on man! They are a fundamental part of the universe! You should not associate everything with your endless disdain of the trilogy's ending. When it comes to your opinion about pretty much anything concerning the ME universe, somehow it is always related to the ending. I just don't get the amount of grudge you hold to something you happen not to like.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want offend you, but I think you (and a few others) take this whole ending issue way more serious than it should be taken. It's what it is. You have mehem, enjoy it, but rebooting the whole universe just because you did not like one aspect of the game is a bit over the top for me. 

I did not like some aspects of the trilogy myself, like the cheesy and constant kissing up to Shepard from every characters part, and I just hate the juvenile power-trip fantasy aspects of it, but I can live with them. If I had a chance to direct the trilogy I can guarantee you that you would get lot darker and more philosophical, mistery oriented, sci-fi horror style hardcore investigation-war story than what we got and you would not be able to play it through without serious sacrafices and getting your main character's hands dirty. You would get more ending options (4 or 5), but each of them would have its share of moral ambiguity and mercilesness. The game is not like that, yet I do not hate it or complain all the time.

Any sequel to the Mass Effect trilogy, direct or not, will have to deal with the endings at some level.  They all represent a fundamental change to the galaxy, changes I absolutely despise (no surprise here, of course).  This isn't just "one aspect" this is the nature of the IP going forward.

This is why I support AU.  Clean slate.  Teh turians and asari comment are a semiserious comment on how I do not want any of the endings to be canon.

Just an example. I'm a hardcore Tolkien fan. A much bigger fan of his writing than of the ME-trilogy. I was 7 years old when I read The Hobbit, I was 11 (that was 18 years ago) when I read the TLOTR-trilogy. Ever since I have re-read those books in every two or three years and of course I read all the other Tolkien books as well. I just love Tolkien.
When Peter Jackson decided to create a film-trilogy I was thrilled as hell. The trilogy came out and I enjoyed it despite the obvious changes. Some of them I liked, some of them I did not. They are far from being perfect, but they are good films and are mostly true to the spirit of Tolkien's writing.
Ten years later we get The Hobbit trilogy. I was not happy when I heard that they were going for a trilogy with such a short book. Two films? Great! Three films? I smell milk here... The first film came out, and while it was certainly not TLOTR, it was still a good movie which I liked a lot. A year later comes The Desolation of Smaug... the complete hollywoodisation of Tolkien and totally new level of cheese, sloppy writing, editing and video-gamey moments on the silver-screen. Ok, maybe not as bad as Pacific Rim and the likes of it were, but still. While the film had great Tolkien moments was a complete waste of money and effort and took way too much liberty and straied too far away from the written word and the spirit of the book. In one word: I dislike it a lot. To me, it is like the ending of ME3's ending to you. And guess what. I walked out of the cinema and haven't cared about the film ever since. I will give it another shot when the director's cut comes out, but until then I don't care about it and I would certainly not rage about it. 

One difference here:  The Hobbit movies are a reinterpretation of the original Tolkien books.  It's not like the Tolkien estate declared the Desolation of Smaug the new canon and are commissioning new books based off of those events.

If that happened, yeah I could see rage being perfectly justified.

Making a direct sequel to the ME3 endings is, to me, making Desolation of Smaug canon.

[Oni Changas]

1. Sequel
2. Human answer to Commandos, Blackwatch, Aralakh Company, STG.
3. Volus and Elcor. Useless races comparatively speaking. Unique, but lame. Hanar have very interesting culture and their relationship with Drell gives them tons of mystique.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

One difference here:  The Hobbit movies are a reinterpretation of the original Tolkien books.  It's not like the Tolkien estate declared the Desolation of Smaug the new canon and are commissioning new books based off of those events.

If that happened, yeah I could see rage being perfectly justified.

Making a direct sequel to the ME3 endings is, to me, making Desolation of Smaug canon.

Sounds to me like you're the one asking to make Desolation of Smaug canon. You're the one asking for an AU, right?

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

One difference here:  The Hobbit movies are a reinterpretation of the original Tolkien books.  It's not like the Tolkien estate declared the Desolation of Smaug the new canon and are commissioning new books based off of those events.

If that happened, yeah I could see rage being perfectly justified.

Making a direct sequel to the ME3 endings is, to me, making Desolation of Smaug canon.

Sounds to me like you're the one asking to make Desolation of Smaug canon. You're the one asking for an AU, right?

We were talking about likes and dislikes and why someone would keep hating the endings even after all this time.  Which I explained (any sequel will have to continue dealing with these endings)  They can't simply be pushed aside and ignored.

With an AU, they can be ignored.  If you liked the book or the movies, both are valid.  Because an AU won't follow either.

[FlyingSquirrel]

1) Prequel, midquel, or alternate universe.

2) Um...what it says in the game? (That is, elite Alliance soldier.) Kind of a strangely phrased question.

3) Hanar and vorcha. Not that they *couldn't* have complex and interesting backstories, but I'd prefer more development of the species that have already captured our interest rather than building up a species that has mostly been in the background so far. The drell are also a bit of a blank slate, but if a lot of them have religious and philosophical beliefs similar to Thane's, I could see a game benefiting from further focus on them.

And I'm surprised to see so many people saying elcor - their speech pattern is one of my favorite "comic relief" elements of Mass Effect. Or perhaps I should say, "Surprised - their speech pattern is one of my favorite comic relief elements of Mass Effect."

Modifié par FlyingSquirrel, 23 janvier 2014 - 04:52 .

[Massa FX]

Kaidan Fan wrote...

1. Sequel
2. Best of the best (themikefest took it right out of my brain)
3. Geth and Batarians.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...
We were talking about likes and dislikes and why someone would keep hating the endings even after all this time.  Which I explained (any sequel will have to continue dealing with these endings)  They can't simply be pushed aside and ignored.

With an AU, they can be ignored.  If you liked the book or the movies, both are valid.  Because an AU won't follow either.

Ok, but Desolation of Smaug isn't a great metaphor for your position. You want something where the original is worse. How about Battlestar Galactica?

[shodiswe]

Artifex_Imperius wrote...

How would BSN answer the questions asked in the so called biowares closed group meetings!

1.) Prequel, Sidequel, Sequel & Alternate Universe. [sequel; overwhelming]

2.)  What does N7 mean to you? [what kind of question is that]

3.) Two races to exclude from the "Next Mass-Effect" [wtf BW are you having budget constraints?] for the good of the series I hope their answers where not selfish!. (the true meaning of the question would be what races would you want your next squaddie be or less likely be). coz no you cant just delete a race in me verse.

At first I wasn't going to but I'll give it a go.

1. Sequel (as in new Protagonist and maybe a few reocuring character from the old game) Which makes it more of a Spinoff. Like Startrek DS9 was a spinoff of Startrek TNG.

2. N7, is an Alliance thing, Shepard was N7 since before you got control of the character, it was backstory. I see N7 persisting in the post Reaper era.
However I forsee that N7 will be an elite Alliance run force, much like the Salarian STG but with a more in your face attitude, though not nessesarily in every situation. (Meaning stealth operatives of that unit will exis)
The N7 of the future will have Instructors and Recruits from almost every species, (at least those with some kind of Citadel relationship, like an embassy).
A lot of top quality military recruits from all over the galaxy will be applying for N7 transfer to join the most elite peacekeepeers with the best training, best equipment and the most interesting or horrifying missions around, whichever way you view it.

Their presense in any hotspots of the Galaxy will be a show of force from the Citadel council and the alliance.

The next character doesn't have to be N7. I know a lot of other people really doesn't want them to be N7 since that makes them have to follow orders.
I guess it could be possible to be a former N7 or a N7 dropout.

Shortstory, I would want it to exist in the universe to boost the Lore and conectivity to the trilogy.

3. I guess Drell or Vorcha, Elchor would be a good choice aswell since I doubt one would ever become available for your Squad. Drell because they are barely noticed, Vorcha, because I don't need one in my Squad. Elchor since they don't make the best Squad material for a game even if their backmounted cannons and grenadelaunchers could be impressive.
I don't want their species removed from the universe however.

[CrutchCricket]

[quote]iakus wrote...

Alternate Universe.  I have no interest in visiting a universe where RGB happened[/quote]
[/quote]
Indeed. I have no interest in a new Mass Effect but I'm a little surprised by all the people saying sequel.

Do you want even your final choice steamrolled or otherwise overlooked? As ****ty as the RGB is, even its fiercest detractors have at least made a choice, whether it be one of the colors, refuse or MEHEM and I think most have made some peace with that choice. Whether that peace is final closure or whether the consequences going forward fuel some personalized headcanon, at least give us that. Leave it alone.

I would personally despise an AU/reboot, mostly because I hate reboots and prefer unbroken continuity in a franchise.

The only choice left is prequel, though I don't like it either because prequel implies covering main events that lead up to the events already covered and the obvious question is what's the point? We know enough about past events to make a game about them redundant.

So if pressed, I'd have to say go back to your roots- character focus. Small scale story set before the war (or during), apart from the Shepard saga, where you can focus on characters and the interpersonal. We've seen the galaxy at stake and it wasn't pretty. Less is more.

[N7Gold]

These would be my answers:

1. Sequel (As a character in one of my favorie Sci-Fi movies, "Minority Report" said: "The future is more interesting than the past".)

2. To me, N7 represents soldiers who are more than physically and mentally proficient enough to handle high risk missions and make difficult decisions that would make anyone else get cold feet or make a choice that might lead to the victory of the enemy, even if those hard decisions lead to the soldier's victory, and the victory of the people he or she has sworn to defend.

3. I don't know, honestly. They are all so interesting. I guess the Vorcha and Elcor.

Modifié par N7Gold, 23 janvier 2014 - 06:43 .

[dreamgazer]

CrutchCricket wrote...

Do you want even your final choice steamrolled or otherwise overlooked?

Sure.  That's far from a first in this franchise.

If the universe goes in a direction I don't like, I won't advance through the story anymore.  Simple as that.