Right there is the first disagreement, IMO it does not look like Andromeda.
It does look flashy, but since it is a concept art that is to be expected.
I agree, it only looks like a spiral galaxy. Its kinda hard to determine from that aloen which galaxy it is, since both milky way and andromeda are spiral galaxies.
I agree, it only looks like a spiral galaxy. Its kinda hard to determine from that aloen which galaxy it is, since both milky way and andromeda are spiral galaxies.
Not at all. The MW has two spiral arms with sub arm-like appendages. The Andromeda galaxy does not have spiral arms. The dust particles give the appearance of what looks like it but the UV picture provided by NASA in post post #2 clearly shows Andromeda as having a center core cluster of red and much older stars than the rings of outer younger blue stars.
Serious question: why is the assumption fixed on Andromeda? I don't know much about astronomy but aren't there several spiral galaxies out there, a handful visible to the naked eye?
Serious question: why is the assumption fixed on Andromeda? I don't know much about astronomy but aren't there several spiral galaxies out there, a handful visible to the naked eye?
It's all speculation of course. The concept image could be a worm hole or something. However, it appears to be what we know to be the basic layout of the star map. It also looks nothing like the spiral of the MW and instead has prominent rings. Andromeda initially comes to mind, not only because it also contains rings but it's the closet to the MW at 1.5 million light-years away.
The main objective here is... what if?
Urhm no, it was barely a small quarian side-plot/mystery in ME2
There is a galaxy closer to us then we are to the center of the Milky Way.
taken from the wikipedia...
The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy (CMa Dwarf) or Canis Major Overdensity (CMa Overdensity) is a disputed dwarf irregular galaxy in the Local Group, located in the same part of the sky as the constellation Canis Major.
The supposed small galaxy contains a relatively high percentage of red giant stars, and is thought to contain an estimated one billion stars in all.
The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy is classified as an irregular galaxy and is now thought to be the closest neighbouring galaxy to our location in the Milky Way, being located about 25,000 light-years away from our Solar System[2] and 42,000 light-years from the Galactic Center. It has a roughly elliptical shape and is thought to contain as many stars as the Sagittarius Dwarf Elliptical Galaxy, the previous contender for closest galaxy to our location in the Milky Way.
So if you really need a new galaxy why not something closer to home.
There is a galaxy closer to us then we are to the center of the Milky Way.
So if you really need a new galaxy why not something closer to home.
I think some see this thread as more of a petition to force the Andromeda galaxy, as to merely speculating 'what if it's Andromeda' and theorize how it could be so. Thus, the question here is... do you see the elliptical Canis Major, when looking at the conceptual image form the video?
Well, it's not like the CONCEPT image from the video couldn't change.
Damn, sometimes I think people take some stuff waaaaaaay too seriously. Chill, guys! (not directed at anyone in particular, haven't been reading all the posts...).
I HATE this kind of view point. Do you feel like just because you're going to die someday means that anything you do while you live is useless?? Of course not! Mass effect as a whole is *arguably* the best sci-fi game series made, and you don't want to enjoy any of it because of ten minutes of cutscenes? That's just ridiculous....For me, it is the same reason I haven't played a Mass Effect game after my first completion of ME3, other than to play the DLC hoping for something to magically fix it.
Anything set before the space magic explosion has that mess to look forward to. Any character you create before hand is likely to become a husk. Any ship you use to explore the galaxy with will probably be blown up by the Reapers, and any choice you make before that moment is rendered moot.
I think some see this thread as more of a petition to force the Andromeda galaxy, as to merely speculating 'what if it's Andromeda' and theorize how it could be so. Thus, the question here is... do you see the elliptical Canis Major, when looking at the conceptual image form the video?
Your third post in this thread...
What's the Milky Way? The video image? I't clearly not the MW.
We've been all over the MW through the ME series, so far. To me "new space" translates into a new galaxy.
Beyond the imagery. The supporting statements being made seem open for rebuttal. My last post shows a example of a alternative to "new space". Any speculations should also be open to alternative views without being seen as attacks.
Your third post in this thread...
What's the Milky Way? The video image? I't clearly not the MW.
We've been all over the MW through the ME series, so far. To me "new space" translates into a new galaxy.
What about that comment goes against my last statement.
Beyond the imagery. The supporting statements being made seem open for rebuttal. My last post shows a example of a alternative to "new space". Any speculations should also be open to alternative views without being seen as attacks.
It is open.This is a public forum. You are free to opine with whatever view you have.
Attacks? How is it that you feel you came under attack? I made no rude statement nor was it in a derogatory frame.
I actually considered this, but good job bringing it up. I didn't bring it up because the dwarf galaxies don't look like the image (although granted that isn't a good enough reason) - so the more speculation, the better.There is a galaxy closer to us then we are to the center of the Milky Way.
taken from the wikipedia...
The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy (CMa Dwarf) or Canis Major Overdensity (CMa Overdensity) is a disputed dwarf irregular galaxy in the Local Group, located in the same part of the sky as the constellation Canis Major.
The supposed small galaxy contains a relatively high percentage of red giant stars, and is thought to contain an estimated one billion stars in all.
The Canis Major Dwarf Galaxy is classified as an irregular galaxy and is now thought to be the closest neighbouring galaxy to our location in the Milky Way, being located about 25,000 light-years away from our Solar System[2] and 42,000 light-years from the Galactic Center. It has a roughly elliptical shape and is thought to contain as many stars as the Sagittarius Dwarf Elliptical Galaxy, the previous contender for closest galaxy to our location in the Milky Way.
So if you really need a new galaxy why not something closer to home.
I HATE this kind of view point. Do you feel like just because you're going to die someday means that anything you do while you live is useless?? Of course not! Mass effect as a whole is *arguably* the best sci-fi game series made, and you don't want to enjoy any of it because of ten minutes of cutscenes? That's just ridiculous....
It's not an issue of what I want. I want to enjoy everything I possibly can, it doesn't always work out. There are a lot of things that are difficult to enjoy because of a tiny fraction of nastiness. It is difficult to enjoy the 99% of a person's attitude that isn't bigoted against you. It is difficult to enjoy the 99% of a meal that isn't a cockroach. It's not easy to fondly remember the 99% of your day that wasn't being beaten bloody and left for dead.
You may hate the viewpoint all you want to. Hell, I'd change it if I could. The bottom line is that whenever I think about the Shepard games I think about that nauseating ending, and feel a sense of aversion. Maybe you have no problem eating around the rat turd, but for me is renders the entire plate unappetising.
A prequel would be a terrible idea. It would be boring, and perpetually overshadowed by the Reaper threat. Move on, make a sequel, a midiquel, or something else. Anything but a prequel.
Why would it have to be boring or overshadowed?
Most of ME2 is not directly related to the Reapers, and yet people still enjoyed the recruitment and loyalty missions and the character development that accompanied them. Suppose the story revolved around the fate of an endangered human colony in the Traverse, with the colony's fate and the survival of important squadmates and NPCs at stake. I don't see how this would undermine the established history - just because Mindoir and Elysium were the only colony attacks we heard about doesn't mean that they were the only ones. In fact, the general tone of the discussions about human colonization in the ME games suggests to me that there probably were other incidents, or at least that the Alliance was concerned that there might be.
Why would it have to be boring or overshadowed?
Most of ME2 is not directly related to the Reapers, and yet people still enjoyed the recruitment and loyalty missions and the character development that accompanied them. Suppose the story revolved around the fate of an endangered human colony in the Traverse, with the colony's fate and the survival of important squadmates and NPCs at stake. I don't see how this would undermine the established history - just because Mindoir and Elysium were the only colony attacks we heard about doesn't mean that they were the only ones. In fact, the general tone of the discussions about human colonization in the ME games suggests to me that there probably were other incidents, or at least that the Alliance was concerned that there might be.
Mostly just because a prequel by necessity must use threat a that isn't as high profile or existential as the Reapers. Certainly it could be well written and highly entertaining, but it'd be difficult to get rid of an underlying feeling that the main character is sort of playing second fiddle to Shepard.
Mostly just because a prequel by necessity must use threat a that isn't as high profile or existential as the Reapers. Certainly it could be well written and highly entertaining, but it'd be difficult to get rid of an underlying feeling that the main character is sort of playing second fiddle to Shepard.
Well, I'm hoping for a less existential threat anyway. While stories about The End of the World As We Know It have an inherent ability to engage the audience, they're also very difficult to pull off successfully, especially in the context of a video game where so much is placed on the shoulders of the player-character. I think that's part of why elements like the Crucible and the Catalyst had to be introduced - having Shepard (or anyone else) literally be the single person to decide how the war ends means that you almost have to have an out-of-left-field superweapon in the mix.
So if the story is going to be smaller-scale (which I hope it is), I'd rather see a prequel that still incorporates all the political context and historical background than a sequel that sidelines much of that to avoid dealing with the consequences of Shepard's decision at the end of ME3. That's why I'm leery of this "new region of space" aspect, because that sounds like sidelining, regardless of whether it's a prequel or a sequel. Of course, it's best not to jump to too many conclusions yet.
Well, I'm hoping for a less existential threat anyway. While stories about The End of the World As We Know It have an inherent ability to engage the audience, they're also very difficult to pull off successfully, especially in the context of a video game where so much is placed on the shoulders of the player-character. I think that's part of why elements like the Crucible and the Catalyst had to be introduced - having Shepard (or anyone else) literally be the single person to decide how the war ends means that you almost have to have an out-of-left-field superweapon in the mix.
So if the story is going to be smaller-scale (which I hope it is), I'd rather see a prequel that still incorporates all the political context and historical background than a sequel that sidelines much of that to avoid dealing with the consequences of Shepard's decision at the end of ME3. That's why I'm leery of this "new region of space" aspect, because that sounds like sidelining, regardless of whether it's a prequel or a sequel. Of course, it's best not to jump to too many conclusions yet.
That is what they would have to do for a sequel. I rather like the idea because I want a high profile threat (Though not necessarily as high as the Reapers by any means, or even existential, but one that people know about, not one that remains unknown or a historical footnote), and I don't mind sidelining to avoid the ME3 endings, hence why I'm such a big fan Ark Theory.
I would actually find kind of funny if Bioware recornize the plot on ME3 as being so bad they had to go to new Galaxy in order to escape it 
Serious question: why is the assumption fixed on Andromeda? I don't know much about astronomy but aren't there several spiral galaxies out there, a handful visible to the naked eye?
Apart from what other poeple already mentioned, Andromeda is basically the only galaxy other than our own that is widely know (general knowledge category) and 'romanticized' in popular culture. Triangulum galaxy is also big, beautiful, and almost a close as Andromeda, but it's hardly known among general audience. Mass Effect plays hard on established sci-fi & space opera tropes so Andromeda fit in
If there going to move to another galaxy they may as well start a new franchise instead most of the things that made the trilogy great would be gone and possible stories set in the MW would be just wasted.Apart from what other poeple already mentioned, Andromeda is basically the only galaxy other than our own that is widely know (general knowledge category) and 'romanticized' in popular culture. Triangulum galaxy is also big, beautiful, and almost a close as Andromeda, but it's hardly known among general audience. Mass Effect plays hard on established sci-fi & space opera tropes so Andromeda fit in
If there going to move to another galaxy they may as well start a new franchise instead most of the things that made the trilogy great would be gone and possible stories set in the MW would be just wasted.
Locations yes. But races, their tech, fashion/design styles etc could all be preserved. As their background/knowledge of old stories. It's not like any old character would come back even if ME4 stayed in Milky Way. Not likely they would keep dwelling on Genophage/Geth-Quarian subplots anymore after so much focus in the original trilogy. So it would be largely new stories, locations and characters anyway.
Locations yes. But races, their tech, fashion/design styles etc could all be preserved. As their background/knowledge of old stories. It's not like any old character would come back even if ME4 stayed in Milky Way. Not likely they would keep dwelling on Genophage/Geth-Quarian subplots anymore after so much focus in the original trilogy. So it would be largely new stories, locations and characters anyway.
Why go through all that effort to create an interesting setting only to just throw all in the trash it will just be a huge waste, 1% of the galaxy has been explored so there are plenty of new stories to be told, changing the galaxy will just feel like they jumped the shark (which they did with LP, the giant T-800 human reaper).
Modifié par Drone223, 19 juin 2014 - 06:26 .
They're only discarding the setting if you truly believe setting just means location.Why go through all that effort to create an interesting setting only to just throw all in the trash it will just be a huge waste, 1% of the galaxy has been explored so there are plenty of new stories to be told, changing the galaxy will just feel like they jumped the shark (which they did with LP, the
giant T-800human reaper).
The setting is one many things that made the franchise great and it has such much potential, it'll be a huge waste if they get ride of it not to mention they'll be jumping the shark in doing so.They're only discarding the setting if you truly believe setting just means location.
Your objection here makes very little sense to me. ME1 explored the Citadel, Noveria, Feros, Therum, Ilos, Virmire and a number of various optional worlds which far outnumbered the plot worlds. ME2 explored Omega, the Wards, Illium, Tuchanka, several brief exposures to plot-driven missions on new worlds, space stations, and all of which were far outnumbered by the optional worlds - also almost all new. ME3 let you explore the Citadel, a number of plot-driven missions on new/old worlds and a number of optional missions on new/old worlds which far outnumbered the required missions.Why go through all that effort to create an interesting setting only to just throw all in the trash it will just be a huge waste, 1% of the galaxy has been explored so there are plenty of new stories to be told, changing the galaxy will just feel like they jumped the shark (which they did with LP, the
giant T-800human reaper).
Retour en haut