60 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabooooom]

The first contact war (or some engagements from it) could just be the introduction to the game, I imagine an incredible ammount of stuff went down in the weeks and months following the end of the war, and could be the basis for exploration and adventure applenty, first contacts with the other counci species ect...


However the idea of a prequel depresses me greatly

This is still such a horrendous idea that I really doubt bioware would actually think any sort of prequel in the thirty years preceding the Mass Effect trilogy would be economically intelligent.

I don't think any of us have anything to worry about. It will be a sequel.

[Applepie_Svk]

First Contact War: Limited engagement with a Turian patrol fleet, surrendering, then watching as the patrol fleet is forced to withdraw. 

60$ right there. 

 

1 hour of gameplay 15 minutes of video sequence and 10 minutes long slideshow at the end...

 

 

This is still such a horrendous idea that I really doubt bioware would actually think any sort of prequel in the thirty years preceding the Mass Effect trilogy would be economically intelligent.

I don't think any of us have anything to worry about. It will be a sequel.

 

 

sequel could be really hard to manage, it´s also possibile the they will either make a canon for ME3, choose some shady theory or they will simply made an alternative reality with words - Shepurd stury iz ouver...

[John of Gaunt]

Mass Effect: First Contact War would work better as a mobile game methinks.

[Kabooooom]

Sequel could be really easy to manage if it is done right- but they will have to canonize an ending. The obvious choice would be synthesis, as given enough time, both control and destroy end in synthesis since it is "inevitable". But god damn, I would hate it if they did that.

And so would most people. So my guess is they will canonize destroy. It is not only the fan favorite, but also the ending that is the least stagnant and most interesting for story branches post-war.

[Applepie_Svk]

"inevitable"

 

Well, you know what they are saying, if your friend told you to jump from the bridge, would you jump ?  Basic problem with this thesis is that it´s not even your friend who´s telling you about an inevitability of synthesis, it´s an enemy - whole new entity, introduced in last 10 minutes of 70 hours of trilogy...

[Kabooooom]

Depends. If other people were jumping from that bridge, it was not dangerously high, they did not die, the water was sufficiently deep and they seemed to be having a fun time then f*ck yeah I'd jump from that bridge.

One time I was drunk in Acapulco, watching the cliff divers as the prayed to a statue of the Virgin Mary before taking their plunge. Right as one dude was about to jump, an earthquake hit, he slipped and nearly fell. At first I thought it was just all the margaritas I drank...but the next dude, the next dude prayed extra hard. If the first guy just jumped instead of pussyfooting around it for awhile, it never would have been an issue.

I don't know what that had to do with anything. Just always amused me I guess.

[DoomsdayDevice]

Yeah, first contact war would be ludicrous.

 

Not gonna happen.

[BigglesFlysAgain]

Then again it could be a reboot in an alternate universe (that still has element zero and all the trappings that come with it) but no reapers and mass relays... Species would have developed on their own lines rather than copy and pasting from the previous cycle... Humans would obviously exist but the timeline would be futher in the future. Would likely have come across different species than before due to no cycles wiping people out and exploration in new directions. Travel is much much slower and more expensive so the Galaxy would be a much bigger place, more akin to star trek, with all the (human) action centered on a small slice of the galaxy, rather than following the paths of the relays. Without the or a alien council it would be a much more dangerous place for humans at first contact.

 

Though if this is the case it begs the question why have the evil AI's not destroyed all organic life? as I thought that was inevitable .

 

Universe building 101 suggests you don't throw away all the lore and history you spent much time and money creating after only making 3 games in a 5 year period. Then again perhaps they want to buck the trend on "immortal" franchises like halo, and the mass effect universe as we know it was just meant to be a sandpit for the story of shepard, a piece of modeling clay to be moulded to the will of the player, a piece of clay that was left a bit past its best after me3, covered in lint and dog hairs after being dropped on the carpet a few times, and starting to get a bit dry and crumbly after being left out in the air for too long. The new team may want to start with a fresh piece of clay.

 

They may buy the same colour and brand of clay, but it won't be the same as the dog eared piece.

[zestalyn]

I would not want to play an alternate universe.. too awkward and complicated, and feels anticlimactic towards all the effort spent in ME1-3 developing your own Shepard's story and fighting the Reapers. 

[AlanC9]

The only people who really want an AU are ones who are too traumatized by the endings to want to go back.

[BigglesFlysAgain]

I don't really want an AU, seems a waste of a good U! But at this point it seems as likely as cannon ending sequels  successors or prequels.

 

The whole "It does not have to happen before, after or during the me trilogy" could just be a troll misdirection of course.

 

If there was a cannon successor game, they would not have to pick the "best" ending for it (which is up for debate oc).

 

Metro 2033 has 2 endings (spoilers)

 

Nuking the mutant Dark Ones is the ending that the next game bases its plot around, while the slighlty harder to get one (where you realise they are not a threat, and befriend them) is probably a lot better for the world the characters inhabit, the lack of conflict invovled in this scenario would not make for an interesting sequel. (note don't draw parralels to Me3 as the dark ones are NOT the reapers!).

 

I.e the universe needs to be a messed up place to make an interesting dramatic game. The alternate ending to breaking bad episode 1 where Walter White accepts his friends charity and gets no strings attached cancer treatment would not be an interesting 5 seasons.

 

I don't think Control would be that fun, as most stories would go: "we need a hero to stop this new threat! ***Reaper shep, I got this one you guys, assuming direct control*** Wow that was easy". Or Shepard going bad after hanging around for a bit too long and not running things for everyones best interests any more.

 

Or Synthesis, if it is as benevolent as some speculate, then there is no more conflict and everything is dandy... Again, perhaps a good idea, but not something worth playing.

 

Destroy. The Galaxy is in a right state, people are cut off from each other, some technology damaged, some written off. Who knows what the timescale for a complete relay network fix will be. Many directly invovled in the war effort will have found comradeship with their alien allies, but what about the colonists in the back end of knowhere, who survived the reapers by the skin of their teeth? They won't be seeing the victory flotilla for months or years, petty warlords and pocket empires will rise and fall, and they may feel abandoned by their barely functioning leaderships.

 

Will they rejoin the fold when the time comes or resist? Will the systems alliance and alien leaders allow this dissent or crack down?

 

 

Of course I could be talking a load of quads.

[Bardox9]

Pleeeease Bioware gods don't make ME4 a prequel! Save that for movies or novels or web browser games. Not backward. FORWARD!!

[mybudgee]

Mass Effect: Sex-box

[RZIBARA]

If the next game is actually about the first contact war, I'm 90% sure I wont be buying it.

 

They'll have to blow me away with pre-release footage

[AlanC9]

 
The whole "It does not have to happen before, after or during the me trilogy" could just be a troll misdirection of course..

It was simply a true statement. Since Bio's never released any official information about the game, any of those could be true, and any of those could be false.

[mybudgee]

Mass Effect 4: Grav Lox

[ahnariprellik]

Honestly, it has to be a prequel. Any enemy that is lesser than the Reapers or Leviathans would just be a joke if they were to do a sequel. Unless the sequel does in fact take place after ME3 and does somehow still involve Shepard. There is still the matter of the breathe scene after the destroy ending (this is the ONLY ending in the game where we see Shepard, presumably dead, take one gasping breathe before the credits hinting that it may not be the last we see of Shepard). However, if they do a prequel there isnt much reason to hold onto our saves and the recent rumor of a ME trilogy release on Next gen like with saves transferring to the new consoles seems to also hint that ME4 may be a direct sequel to ME3. Without further details though there is no way to tell.

[dreamgazer]

Any enemy that is lesser than the Reapers or Leviathans would just be a joke if they were to do a sequel.

 

That's actually a pretty appealing point in favor of a sequel without them.  A far less powerful foe sounds fabulous.

[ahnariprellik]

Eh. To me a less powerful foe would be lame. Also we should have at least had an epic boss to throw down against to end the Trilogy Proper. But alas, we wont know anything for sure until E3.

[dreamgazer]

Eh. To me a less powerful foe would be lame. Also we should have at least had an epic boss to throw down against to end the Trilogy Proper. But alas, we wont know anything for sure until E3.

 

BioWare struggled enough with the Reapers.  They don't need bigger. 

 

And folks were lucky enough to take out three or four Reapers on their own in ME3. That was pushing it as-is. 

 

Also, I'm really glad we didn't get a certain "boss battle" at the end of ME3.

 

 

Ugh.

[ahnariprellik]

I would have much rather had the Reaper TIM showdown than the "battle of wits" we had with him when we already half dead. That was a cop out for Bioware IMO. Harbinger should have been the final boss anyway.To me though, if all we fight are Batarians and bandits I will be REALLY disappointed. If you cant top the Reapers as a villain then either go back to IT theory and continue the war to a proper conclusion or don't even both making a direct sequel and just do prequels in between the original entries. That would still be lame though

[dreamgazer]

Squaring off against the tiny Reaper on Rannoch was, in itself, pretty ridiculous.  How on earth would a battle with Harbinger work? 

[ahnariprellik]

The normandy's weapons system. And possibly EDI using her AI magic. Anything would be better than what we got. Marauder Shields was the worst boss ever but he did try to save us from what came immediately after. Also its freaking Shepard. He was determined. He would find a way. Also if you noticed during the run to the beam Harbinger PURPOSELY misses Shepard or just simply ignores him and the Normandy. Seems he is a really bad shot or didnt wanna kill Shepard. Believe what you want with that scenario though. But if Harbinger is that bad of a shot then I think Shep could take him like he did the Reaper on Rannoch

[dreamgazer]

Sorry, but that does sound worse than what we got.

[wolfhowwl]

Eh. To me a less powerful foe would be lame. Also we should have at least had an epic boss to throw down against to end the Trilogy Proper. But alas, we wont know anything for sure until E3.

 

A less powerful foe would be fine. Keep in mind that the most popular entry in the series is the one that was a character-driven dirty dozen plot against an opponent that could have been easily swapped out for a terrorist group.