Grunt has to be there. If not, I'll die a little inside.
ME4 rumors
Débuté par
thehomeworld
, avril 29 2014 09:49
Retour en haut
#27
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 12:03
ImaginaryMatter
-
- Members
- 4 163 messages
I don't mind the Krogan too much. If the next game involves them I would like to see Wreav. He's probably my favorite Krogan.
He'll probably be in Australia, mate.
#28
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 05:09
shodiswe
-
- Members
- 4 999 messages
While there are several conclusions and opinons I dissagree on in the OP, I'll give a short rundown of my thoughts of this material that's very old and no doubt been discussed before.
I agree on the sequel part in the sense that it will be set in the aftermath of the reaper war or in the future. It's the feeling I get from all the comments and sources around.
"What N7 means" Yes, that would be for marketing assuming any of this ever happend.
I would also be surprised by the notion of removing the Quarians and Krogans, if a small group of fans choose that then it would be because of the genophage cure/reaper war, and the fact that the Quarians could be killed of and the fact that the largest plurality choose to kill off the Quarians in The ME3 campain. I don't know. Maybe there are such people out there, that rationalise in such a way.
If in deed Biowared did ask this, then I belive they wanted to know which species needed less "screen time" they might not actualy be gone but they might become side characters and anonymous people in a crowd saying something funny, like the Krogan fish guy.
Stranger in a strange place wouldn't work unless you are explorers exploring new parts of the galaxy, most of the galaxy is unexplored. Maybe the new protagonist is a Star Trek Pikard or Kirk type of character.... Probably more kirk with a penchant for romancing just about every slug he/she encounters out in unknown space.
Or you would play a new race/species that's new to the council species(seems unlikely sine a lot of people especialy new people wants to play as humans).
I do not agree that Destroy would be the best or only choice, and I certainly don't agree with Refuse as a viable option(especialy since it wasn't intended as one initialy). They can dismiss the effects of all endings just as easily as the choice to save or destroy the collector base. They can g odown the path that Synthesis eventualy happend anyway, either by peopel upgradign themselves or Shepard picking Synthesis, in the end it didn't change things as much as the catalyst and others thought. It might have boosted technologhy but it chagnes little since everyones technology and knowledge got boosted.
I do agree with the Notion of N7 becoming multi species taskforce run and financed by the alliance and in support of the Councils needs, similar to how the Salarian STG supports the Council when asked for.
It would be the place all wanabe supersoldiers and operatives of the galaxy would file for a replacement to to get the optimal challenge and best training and best equipment. Getting in would be hard though given how large the galaxy is and how few people they are likely to train.
It would make sense that there would be those that would want to follow in Shepards footsteps, and those of multiple species who served under Hacket's special operations command(Multiplayer N7).
I'm not concerned about their choice of "game Engine" the engine can be pretty much anything they want, they jsut have to adapt it.
Look at Star Citizen, it's using the Cry3 engine to make a space dogfighting game with groundside and FPS boarding of ships. Trade, exploration, piracy, bountyhunting, a sandbox universe.... If they can turn a FPS engine into that, then we don't need to worry about Frostbite for a Mass Effect game.
I agree on the sequel part in the sense that it will be set in the aftermath of the reaper war or in the future. It's the feeling I get from all the comments and sources around.
"What N7 means" Yes, that would be for marketing assuming any of this ever happend.
I would also be surprised by the notion of removing the Quarians and Krogans, if a small group of fans choose that then it would be because of the genophage cure/reaper war, and the fact that the Quarians could be killed of and the fact that the largest plurality choose to kill off the Quarians in The ME3 campain. I don't know. Maybe there are such people out there, that rationalise in such a way.
If in deed Biowared did ask this, then I belive they wanted to know which species needed less "screen time" they might not actualy be gone but they might become side characters and anonymous people in a crowd saying something funny, like the Krogan fish guy.
Stranger in a strange place wouldn't work unless you are explorers exploring new parts of the galaxy, most of the galaxy is unexplored. Maybe the new protagonist is a Star Trek Pikard or Kirk type of character.... Probably more kirk with a penchant for romancing just about every slug he/she encounters out in unknown space.
Or you would play a new race/species that's new to the council species(seems unlikely sine a lot of people especialy new people wants to play as humans).
I do not agree that Destroy would be the best or only choice, and I certainly don't agree with Refuse as a viable option(especialy since it wasn't intended as one initialy). They can dismiss the effects of all endings just as easily as the choice to save or destroy the collector base. They can g odown the path that Synthesis eventualy happend anyway, either by peopel upgradign themselves or Shepard picking Synthesis, in the end it didn't change things as much as the catalyst and others thought. It might have boosted technologhy but it chagnes little since everyones technology and knowledge got boosted.
I do agree with the Notion of N7 becoming multi species taskforce run and financed by the alliance and in support of the Councils needs, similar to how the Salarian STG supports the Council when asked for.
It would be the place all wanabe supersoldiers and operatives of the galaxy would file for a replacement to to get the optimal challenge and best training and best equipment. Getting in would be hard though given how large the galaxy is and how few people they are likely to train.
It would make sense that there would be those that would want to follow in Shepards footsteps, and those of multiple species who served under Hacket's special operations command(Multiplayer N7).
I'm not concerned about their choice of "game Engine" the engine can be pretty much anything they want, they jsut have to adapt it.
Look at Star Citizen, it's using the Cry3 engine to make a space dogfighting game with groundside and FPS boarding of ships. Trade, exploration, piracy, bountyhunting, a sandbox universe.... If they can turn a FPS engine into that, then we don't need to worry about Frostbite for a Mass Effect game.
#29
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 11:47
Vortex13
-
- Members
- 4 191 messages
It won't be 50,000 years, at least not from what we've heard. I don't even know where you got that number from. Can you tell me?
And really, don't worry about Synthesis.
That number and the minimum of 10,000 years have been thrown around enough on the forums that whenever someone mentions setting a sequel far enough into the future that all the characters we know and love would have died off, and all mention of Shepard would have faded into legend, it is usually in the realm of 10,000 to 50,000 years. In fact if looking at the "Star Gazer" scene we can see that it is supposed to be set about 10,000 years in the future.
If that is not the main gist of what is being discussed here, then I apologize, it's just a knee jerk reaction on my part. IMO having a sequel set 50,000 years or even 10,000 years in the future (500 -1,000 years is really pushing it) then you are no longer dealing with Mass Effect, just a new IP with "Mass Effect" in the title.
#30
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 05:18
SwobyJ
-
- Members
- 7 375 messages
What if the game includes constant 'flashbacks' (in whatever form) to the 'current' cycle, and has that impact how we play in the later 'cycle'?
#31
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 05:32
Daemul
-
- Members
- 1 428 messages
I can easily see the Quarians and Krogan getting little screen time in ME4, we barely see them over the course of the trilogy, and in the case of the Krogan, seem to be relegated to just being part of joke side quests.
#32
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 06:04
Vortex13
-
- Members
- 4 191 messages
What if the game includes constant 'flashbacks' (in whatever form) to the 'current' cycle, and has that impact how we play in the later 'cycle'?
Its possible, though you would run the risk of pulling an "Assassin's Creed". People tended to really dislike the 'present' sections of those games, and just wanted to play in the 'past'.
#33
Posté 02 mai 2014 - 06:07
SwobyJ
-
- Members
- 7 375 messages
Its possible, though you would run the risk of pulling an "Assassin's Creed". People tended to really dislike the 'present' sections of those games, and just wanted to play in the 'past'.
That's because almost all of the game was in the 'past', and only the story of a single protagonist in that 'past'. AC has its clear weaknesses.
