68 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

Why is it so loathsome?

More specifically, why is it more loathsome than canonizing an ending?

I like my choices to have real consequences.  Consequences so big, in some cases, that one sequel can't contain them all.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 janvier 2014 - 07:54 .

[eyezonlyii]

Navasha wrote...

themikefest wrote...


I thought it was about 3 years from the end of ME1 to the beginning of ME3 

Just guestimating.     It was like 6 months before the Normandy was destroyed after the end of ME1.   Then it took an unspecified amount of time for Liara to track down and recover Shepards body.   Based on the description of events I assume that took a few months as well.   Then you had 2 years to rebuild Shepard.   I would guess the events of ME2 took at minimum a year or so.  Then ME3 starts about 6 months or so after the alpha relay is blown up.  

I don't remember if an actual timeline was ever nailed down, though I am sure it was somewhere.

ME1-2183
ME2-2185
ME3-2186

That's the timeline as I know it.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Why is it so loathsome?

More specifically, why is it more loathsome than canonizing an ending?

I like my choices to have real consequences.  Consequences so big, in this case, that one sequel can't contain them all. 

So how is, say, canonizing Destroy when you chose Control giving your choices real consequences?

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

So how is, say, canonizing Destroy when you chose Control giving your choices real consequences?

Real for that Shepard, I mean; whether I get to play a game set in that particular Shepard's future isn't an issue.

The Shepard who chose canon Destroy isn't any of my Shepards. My Shepards who chose Destroy shaped their world into something like the canon universe; how much alike depending on all the other choices besides the ending. Those Shepards who chose otherwise shaped their worlds into something different.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 janvier 2014 - 08:03 .

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

So how is, say, canonizing Destroy when you chose Control giving your choices real consequences?

Real for that Shepard, I mean; whether I get to play a game set in that particular Shepard's future isn't an issue.

The Shepard who chose canon Destroy isn't any of my Shepards. My Shepards who chose Destroy shaped their world into something like the canon universe; how much alike depending on all the other choices besides the ending. Those Shepards who chose otherwise shaped their worlds into something different.

So if they canonize none of the endings and simply handwave what happened, how is that any different than simply telling everyone "you don't get to play in that particular Shepard's future"? 

[DoomsdayDevice]

Turian: Listen, honey, please... This is how it has to be. Everyone is going through this.
Asari: I know, and I'm sure you'll be fine, but it's just so damn inconvenient. It's like we're pre-spaceflight all of a sudden.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Real for that Shepard, I mean; whether I get to play a game set in that particular Shepard's future isn't an issue.

The Shepard who chose canon Destroy isn't any of my Shepards. My Shepards who chose Destroy shaped their world into something like the canon universe; how much alike depending on all the other choices besides the ending. Those Shepards who chose otherwise shaped their worlds into something different.

So if they canonize none of the endings and simply handwave what happened, how is that any different than simply telling everyone "you don't get to play in that particular Shepard's future"? 

"Handwaved" meaning one of those impossible states that couldn't actually happen in the original trilogy? If so, separate issue. I don't want such a handwave because the handwaved future was never a possible future for any of my Shepards. It's not a branch of the same tree of possibilities, it's a different tree altogether.

Just to break away from ME for a bit, I also think the DA team made a serious mistake by not canonizing the DR. Actually, I think they shouldn't have imported saves at all, but the DR is the issue that really sticks out.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 janvier 2014 - 08:19 .

[AlanC9]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Turian: Listen, honey, please... This is how it has to be. Everyone is going through this.
Asari: I know, and I'm sure you'll be fine, but it's just so damn inconvenient. It's like we're pre-spaceflight all of a sudden.

Huh?

[windsea]

you know it funny that the reason most people think ME4 us impossible without a canonised ending is also why it possible. It is the fact that the endings are undefined that lets everyone come up with whatever reason one ending can't work or so on, but those unknowns can easily be used to make the endings work in a way that the next story can still happen

all we really know is that

Synthesis-everyone is growing, reapers are here, and AIs are alive and have emotions. mass relay can be repair
control-reapers are here and under Shepard's control, AIs are alive mass relay are easily repaired
Destroy-Shepard is alive, reapers are not AIs are not. mass relay will take time to repair
refuse- is not going to happen, I think they already said that.

it easily enough to make story that in no way needs or is affected by those factors.
for example a C-sec officer hurting down a terrorist network on a repaired citadel, a deep space explorer, a mercenary, or any number of story where a massive fleet would be unusable.

also people tend to over value the effect the reapers would have by still being alive, a massive race of machines who came and kill many of their family members and friends would not be too welcome in everyone's normal life. So after they repair the damage from the war, unless Bioware does another war story, they would be pretty unimportant like the Alliance was in ME2.

Modifié par windsea, 24 janvier 2014 - 08:29 .

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

"Handwaved" meaning one of those impossible states that couldn't actually happen in the original trilogy? If so, separate issue. I don't want such a handwave because the handwaved future was never a possible future for any of my Shepards. It's not a branch of the same tree of possibilities, it's a different tree altogether.

In this particular case I simply meant they won't address what choice is made.  They never state if Shepard is alive or dead, if there are Reapers about.  There may be geth, but it's never stated if they are the same geth as before, etc.

But even if they chose a seprate tree to climb, why should that matter to you?  It's shouldn't matter any more than picking a future you didn't choose.  "Sorry, we're not going to explore the choices your Shepard made".  the only difference being everyone is in the same boat.

Just to break away from ME for a bit, I also think the DA team made a serious mistake by not canonizing the DR. Actually, I think they shouldn't have imported saves at all, but the DR is the issue that really sticks out.

The DR was a punt.  We've yet to see what will come of it.  If anything.

Personally, I think it was a mistake to import choices in DA at all.

Modifié par iakus, 24 janvier 2014 - 08:27 .

[SwobyJ]

AlanC9 wrote...

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

Turian: Listen, honey, please... This is how it has to be. Everyone is going through this.
Asari: I know, and I'm sure you'll be fine, but it's just so damn inconvenient. It's like we're pre-spaceflight all of a sudden.

Huh?

Possible foreshadowing.

[Mcfly616]

If it's a sequel, they could just do the import comic where we make all the big choices (just like we could in ME2 and ME3). I know...plenty of people can't even comprehend how BW could make it work. I've explained my perspective on a number of occasions, so I won't bother going into it now. Seeing as how I'd prefer the next game's narrative to be a much more personal affair, I don't see the need to have the hook be an epic trilogy of survival against an unstoppable threat at the end of time. Imo the hook could be the game world.

Make a stand-alone game, with a 'less epic' yet much more personal journey, allowing for actual wildly diverse paths you can take to wildly divergent endgame destinations. (all set in one of three universes determined by your final choice of ME3)

[Mcfly616]

With no promise of a second trilogy and entirely blank slate, the writers don't have to worry about what fan-favorites 'not' to kill off. Creativity will thrive. Hopefully anybody can and will die at any given moment(game of thrones style). Hopefully choices aren't so immediately transparent, and eventually come back to haunt you or benefit you much further down the road after you've long forgotten about it.

Importing the big choices of ME3 are possible because a much more personal story doesn't have to be dictated by it's setting.

[Village_Idiot]

Canonising an ending is highly unlikely. Regardless of which ending might be more popular, designating one as "canon" is something of an insult to those who chose otherwise ("Yeah, that incredibly momentous and galaxy-altering decision you made? Completely invalidated. Sorry!")

Personally, I think that anything post-ME3 in the chronological sense is doubtful. That'll be left to the realms of fanfiction and (shudder) "speculation". ME4 is likely to be a separate (though not necessarily completely disconnected) story arc set within the same timeframe as Shepard's trilogy. It's a big galaxy after all.

[AlanC9]

People didn't always get so whiny about sequels not incorporating all possible choices from the previous game. But maybe we've passed some pont of no return and Mass Effect needs to die.

[AlanC9]

Anyone else having trouble with the site's quote and edit functions? They don't seem to be working on my iPad today.

[Excella Gionne]

That's pretty much hard to do. ME3 ending sealed the fate of the Shepard universe and everything with it. It's gotta be a new universe. You can't satisfy the fanbase with a canon'd ending 'cause there's a lot of things that affect the ending as well.

[Siegdrifa]

Actualy, i think using the ME3 ending as a starting point for ME4 is more intresting.

I'll remind you that all ME3 ending leave 1 important conclusion : our galaxy never had races that evolved past 50 000 year.

So, what if ME4 would make use travel through another galaxy and meet races that evolved for millions of years ?

Technologicaly, it's means a reboot of trilogie original concept. (traveling through another system with the mass effect, meeting more Advanced race with biotic powers at that time etc)

Advanced race mean new challenge, new threat, new opportunity to meet new friends in new conflict.

Each ME3 ending being a flavor to play the same ME4 story. The green glow for synthésis.
For the reapers being there in synthesis and control, it's mean they could be used as a dreadnought armada to protect our galaxy, for the destroy version, it would be an armada composed from all main races, since destroy is about hardening the friendship between all races to overcome all odds.

[dreamgazer]

Anyone else having trouble with the site's quote and edit functions? They don't seem to be working on my iPad today.

Yeah, quoting and editing both seem to be jacked. Have to do it old-school.

[Mcfly616]

If they do a sequel and don't have the balls to import our choices, that'd be my biggest disappointment. If they won't do it then I'd prefer they just did a prequel, side-quel or Alternate Universe. The galaxy is a big place with infinite amount of stories to tell.

It's a shame we've continuously run from point A to point B throughout the last 2 games. I'm sick of looking at the galaxy map and knowing that we've barely "explored" any of it. Hopefully that changes.

More important than any time period the next game is set in, I just don't want to see any of Shepard's crew at all.

[Dubozz]

Sequel with no canonised ME3 ending - the game I won't buy.

[Almostfaceman]

@Mcfly616 - I don't know if it's so much a matter of "balls" to import our choices as it's a snowballing unworkable splayed start of complexity that they just don't have the time or resources to contend with it all. It could theoretically end up being three whole separate games. I don't see that happening.

[Sanunes]

No matter what BioWare decides to do people are going to hate it, even despise it. If they ignore the ending of the game "why are my choices no important" same if they canonize some, if they decide to make it during the Shepard time frame "why are you scared of my choices" or "BioWare is playing it safe" if they decide to make a prequel "this sucks we know how it turns out already".

What I hope is BioWare just picks something and makes a good story and no matter what route they choose abandon Shepard quickly and not have any variables imported let people be upset at the start of the game and make a quality game so people will quickly let the subject drop, just like the start of Mass Effect 2.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

It's damned if you do; damned if you don't. So canonize an ending, write the sequel, really ****** off about 100,000 people, and claim artistic integrity. There's no import anyway because.... new consoles.

[ImaginaryMatter]

The sequel could take place far enough afterwards that the Reapers have left for 'mysterious reasons' if the Control or Synthesis endings were chosen. That way they wouldn't be present in any of the ending choices. The Geth could follow a similar path, have been rebuilt, upgraded to the new robot race, or live in 'isolation' with the Quarians. The Krogan in the game could be space exploring Krogan bored of rebuilding on Tuchunka or the last remnants of the race.

Basically, I think it is possible that the people and places remain the same, with only a few select dialogues and the Codex entry reflecting the choices made. I wouldn't be a fan of it, but I definitely think it is possible. I could be wrong but I think the Elder Scrolls series did something similar after Daggerfall.