407 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

Considering MEHEM, I suspect that the desired outcome would simply be a "fixed" ending, where the reapers are simply destroyed no matter what, but the state of the galaxy would simply be determined by what you did prior, so there's no decision chamber, no Catalyst or anything like that. I can't say that I'd really have a problem with this, since Dragon Age: Origins pretty much does the same thing, with choices basically determining the fates of certain characters, including the protagonist, while leaving the world open to do whatever the creators want with little problem in the future. From what I understand, it was uncertain as to whether or not there would be more games down the line in that franchise, but the first game left the possibility wide open without having to go backward in time. Had the series simply ended with ME3 for good, then it wouldn't have made much of a difference, but with this new game, it raises a lot of nagging questions for me.

MEHEM is more problematic than any of the 'real' endings....

(but yes, I guess I already knew the answer to the question)

 

 

It's been stated many times that ME3 was simply the end of the Shepard/Reapers story. The next game has nothing to do with them. 

[luzburg]

im still intrested in mass effect, me3 is to me a great game but the ending sucks. i just hope me4 is a sequell and they manage to accaunt for all the endings some way and not just choose a cannon ening. but how me4 turn out will be intresting to see, sill im pretty exited about inqusition

[Iakus]

MEHEM is more problematic than any of the 'real' endings....

(but yes, I guess I already knew the answer to the question)

 

 

It's been stated many times that ME3 was simply the end of the Shepard/Reapers story. The next game has nothing to do with them. 

Except any sequel has to deal with the ending choice as well several other major decisions Shepard makes.  Unless they simply handwave it all away.

 

At this point, handwaving would not be the worst option to go with.

[Mcfly616]

Except any sequel has to deal with the ending choice as well several other major decisions Shepard makes.  Unless they simply handwave it all away.

 

At this point, handwaving would not be the worst option to go with.

it doesn't need to be a sequel. The MEU is vast and for the most part, unexplored. Every individual has a story to tell. Plenty of potential.

[AlanC9]

But iakus is right that there's an issue there, though we disagree on the appropriate solution. Even before you get to the ending, the geth are exterminated, or not. The quarians are on Rannoch, or they're destroyed. Oddly, the genophage is the least problematic aspect here; even if the cure is sabotaged in ME3 it could be cured at a later date, and the Mordin ending slide implies that he'll work on it.

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

it doesn't need to be a sequel. The MEU is vast and for the most part, unexplored. Every individual has a story to tell. Plenty of potential.

 

Not every story, or even most stories, are worth listening too, and there really isn't a market or want to go backwards in time. You can't ignore everything that happens for the sake of it being unrelated to the rest of the franchise.

[Mcfly616]

Not every story, or even most stories, are worth listening too, and there really isn't a market or want to go backwards in time. You can't ignore everything that happens for the sake of it being unrelated to the rest of the franchise.

Not every story is worth listening to. But when there's trillions of beings in the galaxy, I'm sure there's a few. And if it has nothing to do with Shepard and the Reapers then it really shouldn't matter when it takes place.

 

 

Just because WW2 happened doesn't mean every good story that comes about, has something to do with it.....or comes after it. 

[DirtySHISN0]

I love the ME universe so much.....I just cannot see a way around/a recovery from the ME3 ending without trivialising absolutely everything that happened in it.

[Mcfly616]

But iakus is right that there's an issue there, though we disagree on the appropriate solution. Even before you get to the ending, the geth are exterminated, or not. The quarians are on Rannoch, or they're destroyed. Oddly, the genophage is the least problematic aspect here; even if the cure is sabotaged in ME3 it could be cured at a later date, and the Mordin ending slide implies that he'll work on it.

Which is why a literal sequel is probably the most idiotic idea they could implement.

[The_Other_M]

Nope, can't be excited for something that barely exists.

Right now it's just an idea with a tech demo, and nothing concrete has been done yet.

 

Besides, after the ME3 debacle and EA's various other f*** ups since then, it's really hard to get excited about anything that comes from that company.

 

That being said, everything that is BioWare is riding on how well Dragon Age: Inquisition performs. And will ultimately determine whether or not ME4 will be worth waiting for. 

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

Not every story is worth listening to. But when there's trillions of beings in the galaxy, I'm sure there's a few. And if it has nothing to do with Shepard and the Reapers then it really shouldn't matter when it takes place.

 

 

Just because WW2 happened doesn't mean every good story that comes about, has something to do with it.....or comes after it. 

 

That's a historical event in reality. Not a fictional setting based on a game with arguably the greatest change in galactic history since the creation of the Reapers.

 

And it should matter, because in said fictional settings, everything is going to all come back together to how it ties into the franchise. It may not have Shepard or the Reapers, but it's damn well going to be a galaxy feeling its effects (the same setting after all, otherwise there would be no point to calling it Mass Effect).

[Mcfly616]

That's a historical event in reality. Not a fictional setting based on a game with arguably the greatest change in galactic history since the creation of the Reapers.

 

And it should matter, because in said fictional settings, everything is going to all come back together to how it ties into the franchise. It may not have Shepard or the Reapers, but it's damn well going to be a galaxy feeling its effects (the same setting after all, otherwise there would be no point to calling it Mass Effect).

I couldn't care less if it was a historical event. The analogy fits. WW2 changed the world and human history. Much like the events of ME3 did to the MEU. Movies and novels tell stories of WW2 all the time. That doesn't mean every movie or novel that depicts an era before WW2 or has nothing to do with WW2, isn't worthwhile.

 

 

Would love to hear your ideas on how they should implement the 3 drastically different world states at the end of ME3 into one cohesive 'sequel'.

 

 

 

Considering the Reapers were nothing more than myth, heard about by very few people, I really don't think it's necessary to incorporate them into a story that has nothing to do with them. Especially if it comes before they ever invade.

[Barquiel]

But iakus is right that there's an issue there, though we disagree on the appropriate solution. Even before you get to the ending, the geth are exterminated, or not. The quarians are on Rannoch, or they're destroyed. Oddly, the genophage is the least problematic aspect here; even if the cure is sabotaged in ME3 it could be cured at a later date, and the Mordin ending slide implies that he'll work on it.

 

I think smaller plots would work just fine without canonizing a lot of things. For example, the geth/quarian situation can be more or less ignored if there is no huge story arc on Rannoch.

I guess Synthesis can be downplayed a bit (green skin glow has worn off etc.), but it is still the main problem, imo. Refuse and low ems would have to be declared non-canon, of course.

[Reorte]

I couldn't care less if it was a historical event. The analogy fits.

No it doesn't, because of where ME3 leaves us. It leaves us with a big cloud hanging over the ME universe, from which we don't know what happens. It's the equivalent of trying to set stories in the future when you're living in the middle of WWII. A sequel, even a canon novel, that establishes the state of the ME universe post ME3 (instead of just a few wishy-washy slides) so that it feels that the ME universe has moved on, then it might be worth having prequels. At present though it just leaves a "what's the point?" feeling.

With WWII we know what happens afterwards and how the world moved on. As a whole, whilst having a massive impact, it also didn't have an impact quite the same size as the Reaper war. Individual events did to their own locale - a series that was set in Hiroshima where the last sentence is the dropping of the bomb probably won't have people clamouring for prequels no matter how popular, not at least people find out whatever happened to the main fictional parts of the story.
 

I think smaller plots would work just fine without canonizing a lot of things. For example, the geth/quarian situation can be more or less ignored if there is no huge story arc on Rannoch.

Ignoring them leaves out significant chunks of the ME universe. Whilst there should be plenty we've never even heard about to fill a whole story the complete absence of anything whatsoever of what's been a big part of it up to now is fairly glaring. My personal preference for trying to make the best of a bad situation is to just say "There was a Reaper war, lots of stuff damaged, gloss over the details", giving us what happens no matter and simply ignoring the other choices. And don't ever have universe-changing decisions again.

[Iakus]

But iakus is right that there's an issue there, though we disagree on the appropriate solution. Even before you get to the ending, the geth are exterminated, or not. The quarians are on Rannoch, or they're destroyed. Oddly, the genophage is the least problematic aspect here; even if the cure is sabotaged in ME3 it could be cured at a later date, and the Mordin ending slide implies that he'll work on it.

Unless the bomb goes off, and wipes out most of the krogan civilians, of course .

 

But yes, you have it exactly.

[Mcfly616]

No it doesn't, because of where ME3 leaves us. It leaves us with a big cloud hanging over the ME universe, from which we don't know what happens. It's the equivalent of trying to set stories in the future when you're living in the middle of WWII. A sequel, even a canon novel, that establishes the state of the ME universe post ME3 (instead of just a few wishy-washy slides) so that it feels that the ME universe has moved on, then it might be worth having prequels. At present though it just leaves a "what's the point?" feeling.

With WWII we know what happens afterwards and how the world moved on. As a whole, whilst having a massive impact, it also didn't have an impact quite the same size as the Reaper war. Individual events did to their own locale - a series that was set in Hiroshima where the last sentence is the dropping of the bomb probably won't have people clamouring for prequels no matter how popular, not at least people find out whatever happened to the main fictional parts of the story.
  

Hmm except that the series didn't leave off with us 'dropping the bomb' (i.e. firing the Crucible)

 

It shows you the end of the war. The slides (whether you like them or not) show you the new beginning the choices provided and what course we may take. It shows what happens afterwards and beyond. Just maybe not in as much detail as you would like. If you don't like speculation on what the future holds, you may want to avoid the sci-fi genre as a whole.  

 

 

 

Anyways.....could you describe how 'you' would produce a sequel incorporating all the choices from the Shepard Trilogy, including the 3 endings. 

[Iakus]

 

 

Anyways.....could you describe how 'you' would produce a sequel incorporating all the choices from the Shepard Trilogy, including the 3 endings. 

 

I couldn't.  Not without trivializing everything.  And that's the problem.  And the only solution I see is a tabula rasa. Don't just make MENext "not about Shepard" but forget the entire trilogy happened to begin with.  AU, reimagining, call it what you will.  But start over.

[Reorte]

Hmm except that the series didn't leave off with us 'dropping the bomb' (i.e. firing the Crucible)
 
It shows you the end of the war. The slides (whether you like them or not) show you the new beginning the choices provided and what course we may take. It shows what happens afterwards and beyond. Just maybe not in as much detail as you would like. If you don't speculation on what the future holds, you may want to avoid the sci-fi genre as a whole.  
 
Anyways.....could you describe how 'you' would produce a sequel incorporating all the choices from the Shepard Trilogy, including the 3 endings.

The slides don't provide anything much, a mere glimpse that doesn't really help properly establish the state of things. We need to "live" in it, even briefly for it to work IMO. One small novel or comic might be enough to make a prequel tolerable if it shows us a universe where there's a good chance of anything done in that prequel having any meaning. Rationally you could argue the slides do, emotionally I think that they fail and fiction has to live or die on its emotional impact as much as its technical aspects.

Like I said what I'd do is simply say "There was a Reaper War" and forget about the rest (barring a suitably damaged galaxy with whatever would be feasibly rebuilt by the time the sequel is set), not even trying to accommodate the ME3 choices. That's very much a "least bad" option though. I'd be fine with whatever being inconsistent with any of the choices under the circumstances, although it helps that I feel they're all something best forgotten anyway.

[Mcfly616]

I couldn't.  Not without trivializing everything.  And that's the problem.  And the only solution I see is a tabula rasa. Don't just make MENext "not about Shepard" but forget the entire trilogy happened to begin with.  AU, reimagining, call it what you will.  But start over.

I would have absolutely no problem with an AU. And for the past year or more, it's what I expect when the game releases (ever since Priestly's comments). But I also have no problem with a game in the universe we know and love, taking place before the first human spectre, when it would have nothing to do with the original trilogy. I could give two craps about the chronology if it has no ties whatsoever with the previous story anyway.

 

Seems some people just hate the word "prequel", just because....

[Mcfly616]

The slides don't provide anything much, a mere glimpse that doesn't really help properly establish the state of things. We need to "live" in it, even briefly for it to work IMO. One small novel or comic might be enough to make a prequel tolerable if it shows us a universe where there's a good chance of anything done in that prequel having any meaning. Rationally you could argue the slides do, emotionally I think that they fail and fiction has to live or die on its emotional impact as much as its technical aspects.

Like I said what I'd do is simply say "There was a Reaper War" and forget about the rest (barring a suitably damaged galaxy with whatever would be feasibly rebuilt by the time the sequel is set), not even trying to accommodate the ME3 choices. That's very much a "least bad" option though. I'd be fine with whatever being inconsistent with any of the choices under the circumstances, although it helps that I feel they're all something best forgotten anyway.

So, you say it's necessary to experience the aftermath of the Reaper War. And you would do that by saying "none of the real endings of the Reaper War ever happened".  Yeah, you just made your whole point moot.

 

 

 

 

You're basically asking for an AU.....and that's not a sequel.

[Reorte]

So, you say it's necessary to experience the aftermath of the Reaper War. And you would do that by saying none of the real endings of the Reaper War ever happened. Yeah, you just made your whole point moot.
 
You're basically asking for an AU.....and that's not a sequel.

A slight alternative, so what? Sure it's not a complete sequel. It's not as if it would be the first time a sequel has ever retconned anything.

I don't mind experience the aftermath of the Reaper War in seeing devastated worlds being rebuilt and so on, i.e. the plausible stuff. Sealing the ME universe at the point of the ending of ME3 though is terribly restricting and such a waste.

[Ieldra]

Slightly confused by those of you who are so thoroughly unexcited for ME4, and yet you still hang out in these parts of the forums. Face it, you're all going to buy ME4 when it comes out. You can tell yourself you're going to approach it with the utmost "caution" (whatever that means), but just watch, the game will probably begin with an utterly stunning cutscene and introduction, and you are going to get chills down your spine, and the rest of the game is going to be so wonderfully entertaining that you will regret having informed the entire world for the past several years of how "dead" ME is for you 

You see, that's why I'm not saying it's dead, just that the next ME will have an uphill battle winning my regard. As for "why are you still here", I like to stay informed, but I have abandoned game series in the past and I will do so again if I don't think continuing with it will be worth it.

.

[Ieldra]

I couldn't.  Not without trivializing everything.  And that's the problem.  And the only solution I see is a tabula rasa. Don't just make MENext "not about Shepard" but forget the entire trilogy happened to begin with.  AU, reimagining, call it what you will.  But start over.

I would have no problem with that. Shepard's story is in the past, we needn't forever be bound to its legacy.

[Anacronian Stryx]

At the moment Bioware dosen't seem to have any idea about what they are gonna do with ME 4 they only know they are gonna make it... this dosen't exite me.

[KaiserShep]

MEHEM is more problematic than any of the 'real' endings....

(but yes, I guess I already knew the answer to the question)

 

 

It's been stated many times that ME3 was simply the end of the Shepard/Reapers story. The next game has nothing to do with them. 

 

I don't disagree about MEHEM, but I'm simply saying what I think is the desired resolution to ME3, which would be something similar to Dragon Age: Origins, where you get to see your assets at work (varying based on your choices), but there's only one basic outcome for the reapers themselves. Whether or not it's actually like MEHEM in the end is a different matter, since MEHEM doesn't really reconcile some of the bigger issues I find with the final stretch of ME3, which is Priority: Earth itself.