202 réponses à ce sujet

[EatChildren]

So, my 2c, not related to the crap I was told in the OP. Just my own speculation (BWS's favourite word).

I suspect Montreal, being made up of intelligent, collected, talented people (*cough* asskiss *cough*), would fully recognise what fans liked and disliked about the trilogy. I think BioWare as a whole does actually, if Inquisition is anything to go by. Yes, sometimes they make mistakes, and sometimes those mistakes are catastrophic for the fan base. But they still recognise those mistakes. I'm sure internally BioWare is well aware of the feedback on Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2. And I'm sure this is a shadow that hangs over Montreal on a daily basis.

So with that in mind, I think the very last thing Montreal would want to do is compound and convolute the ending disaster. Okay, BioWare stuffed up. Lets move on. Lets look at what fans loved most about the trilogy. Not the specifics, but the themes, the ideas, the mechanics, and so on, and lets focus on building off them along with learning from our mistakes. Much like Edmonton did with Citadel. Montreal is tasked with helming the series post trilogy. I'm sure they're very well aware of the massive task ahead of them and the frankly insane fan expectations. They'll want to focus on the positive, not the negative. Because despite the ending fallout, fact of the matter is many/most of us have multiple fond memories of all three games. There were absolute highlights throughout. So lets bottle that magic again, and not dwell on the worst qualities.

In addition to that, I seriously doubt Montreal would be content retreading the past in such a way that they just do the same old thing over again. Yes, Mass Effect 4 will be a "traditional" Mass Effect with all the themes and stuff we know and love. And Montreal probably will focus on the most positive qualities at all. But I can guarantee they'll also want to surprise, shock, and delight fans with new ideas and new concepts the trilogy never dealt with.

Emphasising the ending and failing to learn from past mistakes would be a worse case scenario. But I think just as bad would be if Montreal simply made Mass Effect 4 a recycling of the trilogy's content with no new ideas. I want a faithful Mass Effect, but I also want to be surprised with entirely new gameplay concepts and ways to interact with the galaxy. And I bet they feel the same way too, wanting not just to live up to expectations based on the trilogy's best parts, but steer the franchise forward into uncharted territory and give fans entirely new concepts to experience.

[Tython]

For the next game, I was wondering what people thought concerning the direction of the series. I'd hope they'd use the Destroy ending, not necessarily because Shepard survives but because the galaxy is in the worst state possible. In Synthesis and Control, the Reapers are there fixing the Citadel and Relays and remain as defenders. Their immense knowledge from hundreds of cycles/races makes them quite powerful. For a long time, the galaxy was surrounded by Reapers in dark space probably keeping out any non Milky Way enemies. In Destroy, the Reapers are gone. It will take longer the repair the Citadel and Relays and their knowledge is gone. The galaxy is also open to potential attack without having them as powerful defenders. The loss of the Geth is minor but the Quarians recovery is slowed down if you made peace. Edi I felt could've been back up or remade.

 

The 4th ending could end up being a Synthesis/Control ending if whoever in the next cycle meets up with the Catalyst chooses that option or it could be a later Destroy. Anyway, Bioware could end up doing a trilogy based on each different ending (blue, red, green) and even the 4th if they choose. I just feel the Destroy ending has more potential. It would also be a positive thing to take orders from Admiral Shepard similar to Admiral Hunter in Robotech.

[CannonO]

I sure hope exploration means some open exploration of uncharted worlds again. That was one of the greatest contributions to the series opening with a strong sense of being in the vastness of space. While the next two titles handled linearity well, they lost the sense of wandering that an explorer among stars would have. Ever since that Uncharted Worlds TV spot for the first game, few of us were anything but lured in by the idea, even if it's execution in the first game had much room to improve and be consolidated.

 

I even miss the little effects and pictures that came up for each planet in a solar system, regardless of whether the player would be landing on it or not.