413 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

There is zero reason why they would need to retcon it at all.

[Pateu]

There is zero reason why they would need to retcon it at all.

 

You mean... apart from a sequel?

[Farangbaa]

You mean... apart from a sequel?

 

They could also make 3 different sequels

[Lucy The Alien]

Simple, you make the endings mean different things.

The Catalyst lied through omission of some of the facts, the reason WHY it was so obsessed with making organics and synthetics co-exist is because the Leviathans couldn't stop them destroying each-other, which meant they had no slaves. Synthesis links every being in the galaxy neurally and therefore with the Leviathan's natural ability to control other races they are linked to; it explains why everyone is so unaturally happy- they are all under Leviathan control.

Control "The many will have a say in their future."
The many simply ask the Reapers to leave once everything is repaired.

Destroy, as Shepard survived the Catalyst was mistaken about the Synthetics being destroyed.

Therefore Synthesis and Refuse become "Reapers win" and are omitted.

While Destroy and Control lead to the same results. With the variable of an immortal Shepard or a human one if you wish.

That's how I'd do it.

[Dan Fango]

That wretched ending needs reworking in its entirety. Retcon away I say!

[Felya87]

If the new ME retcon the multicolor horrors I would probably celebrate with fine wine.

[Dragoonlordz]

You mean... apart from a sequel?

 

Still do not need to retcon the endings. There is no evidence yet to say the next one will take place in the same galaxy and if does not then all it would require would be variations in the dialogues depending on which choice you made, no different than any other choice made between any of the games so far. I gave a solution which would require not retcons in the other thread.

[Pateu]

Simple, you make the endings mean different things.

The Catalyst lied through omission of some of the facts, the reason WHY it was so obsessed with making organics and synthetics co-exist is because the Leviathans couldn't stop them destroying each-other, which meant they had no slaves. Synthesis links every being in the galaxy neurally and therefore with the Leviathan's natural ability to control other races they are linked to; it explains why everyone is so unaturally happy- they are all under Leviathan control.

Control "The many will have a say in their future."
The many simply ask the Reapers to leave once everything is repaired.

Destroy, as Shepard survived the Catalyst was mistaken about the Synthetics being destroyed.

Therefore Synthesis and Refuse become "Reapers win" and are omitted.

While Destroy and Control lead to the same results. With the variable of an immortal Shepard or a human one if you wish.

That's how I'd do it.

 

There's a ton of a difference between knowing the Reapers went poof for good, absolutely annihilated and knowing they're out there, nearly undamaged.

 

Sure, you asked them to leave, but do you have any guarantee they will stay gone? 

 

The galaxy would just live in terror.

[BioWareM0d13]

In order for there to be a sequel I think Bioware has two options, none of which is pretty or likely to please everyone. 

 

The first would be to carry over all three ending choices (Refuse is guaranteed non-canon) but alter the results so that three ending choices don't diverge as much. That might look something like the Geth existing in all three imports with Destroyers getting dialogue or a different codex entry implying the Geth were rebuilt by the Quarians, the absense of green glowy nonsense for Synthesizers, and the Reapers being gone in all three imported endings, with Controllers and Synthesizers getting an explanation for the Reapers retreating into Dark Space or what have you.

 

The second route would be to anoint one of the three original endings as the sole recognized import and build your sequel around it. The other two endings are still canon if you chose them, but they don't have their own sequel to explore the aftermath.

 

Retcons and rebooting aren't viable options for Bioware, IMO.

 

A reboot wouldn't generate much interest beyond the most hardcore of hardcore Mass Effect fans, or those still bitter about the endings. Although any series most devoted fans like to think they are special and worthy of more attention from the devs than more casual players of that series, the reality is that they alone aren't enough to make a game profitable.

 

A retcon would be confusing and totally invalidate all prior games. If you're going to change an ending you do it by introducing DLC for that game, not by rolling out a sequel that announces, "None of that happened."

[Iakus]

In order for there to be a sequel I think Bioware has two options, none of which is pretty or likely to please everyone. 

 

The first would be to carry over all three ending choices (Refuse is guaranteed non-canon) but alter the results so that three ending choices don't diverge as much. That might look something like the Geth existing in all three imports with Destroyers getting dialogue or a different codex entry implying the Geth were rebuilt by the Quarians, the absense of green glowy nonsense for Synthesizers, and the Reapers being gone in all three imported endings, with Controllers and Synthesizers getting an explanation for the Reapers retreating into Dark Space or what have you.

 

The second route would be to anoint one of the three original endings as the sole recognized import and build your sequel around it. The other two endings are still canon if you chose them, but they don't have their own sequel to explore the aftermath.

 

Retcons and rebooting aren't viable options for Bioware, IMO.

 

A reboot wouldn't generate much interest beyond the most hardcore of hardcore Mass Effect fans, or those still bitter about the endings. Although any series most devoted fans like to think they are special and worthy of more attention from the devs than more casual players of that series, the reality is that they alone aren't enough to make a game profitable.

 

A retcon would be confusing and totally invalidate all prior games. If you're going to change an ending you do it by introducing DLC for that game, not by rolling out a sequel that announces, "None of that happened."

The first choice just continues to trivialize choices, leading me to wonder why they bother with imports at all (Councilor Udina, anyone?)

 

The second option goes against everything they've been saying since ME2:  that there is no canon

 

And ditching Refuse as non-canon would make it even more of a sad joke on the player than it already is.

 

As for reboot, it depends.  Completely redoing Shepard's story is unlikely to work, as you say.  But if they just reset the timeline and tell completely different stories, with no mention of Shepard, Reapers, etc from the first game could work.  Shepard's story would still be valid for anyone who wanted to play it.  It would just be a separate story.  The new one wouldn't have any of the baggage of Mass Effects endings, would truly be "a great place to start" for newcomers, and would be a familiar place for the veterans.

[PinkysPain]

Still do not need to retcon the endings. There is no evidence yet to say the next one will take place in the same galaxy and if does not then all it would require would be variations in the dialogues depending on which choice you made, no different than any other choice made between any of the games so far. I gave a solution which would require not retcons in the other thread.

 

If they use a different galaxy calling it Mass Effect 4 is in my opinion false advertising, it would be a spin off ... which would still leave the question how to actually do Mass Effect 4 (not that the solution isn't obvious, canonize destroy).

[BioWareM0d13]

The first choice just continues to trivialize choices, leading me to wonder why they bother with imports at all (Councilor Udina, anyone?)

 

 

I don't disagree. I think one of the problems with the endings of Mass Effect 3 is that they made it very difficult to craft a sequel from. They result in vastly different world states that can only be accounted for in a sequel by anointing one choice the sole import, or by having those diverging paths meet in the middle somewhere. 

 

The difficulties involved in crafting a sequel from ME3's endings are also part of the reason why there is so much speculation about the next game being a sidequel set far outside Citadel space.

 

 

 

Iakus, on 09 Aug 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

 

The second option goes against everything they've been saying since ME2:  that there is no canon

 

That was said before painting themselves into a corner with ME3's endings though. If you're going to do a sequel, the options are now somewhat limited. You either have to roll with a single ending being imported into the sequel or having the results of three ending choices meet in the middle. Synthesis in particular throws a wrench in the works.

 

 

Iakus, on 09 Aug 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

 

And ditching Refuse as non-canon would make it even more of a sad joke on the player than it already is.

 

Refuse is guaranteed non-canon no matter what they do with a sequel. It results in the Reapers winning the war and every faction and species of the galaxy that we've met throughout the first three games being annihilated. It is basically just a more elaborate and detailed version of the Critical Mission Failure screen. Cue Saren's theme song. On top of that unlike the other three ending choices it is DLC only. Most people who have played Mass Effect 3 have probably never even seen it.

 

 

Iakus, on 09 Aug 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

 

As for reboot, it depends.  Completely redoing Shepard's story is unlikely to work, as you say.  But if they just reset the timeline and tell completely different stories, with no mention of Shepard, Reapers, etc from the first game could work.  Shepard's story would still be valid for anyone who wanted to play it.  It would just be a separate story.  The new one wouldn't have any of the baggage of Mass Effects endings, would truly be "a great place to start" for newcomers, and would be a familiar place for the veterans.

 

I'm not sure there would be enough interest in an alternate timeline where Shepard and the Reapers don't exist. No matter what Bioware does it is going to get a hefty amount of criticism at this point, but I think going that route risks a bit more backlash than the others. Most fans seem to want a sequel, even if they aren't considering the challenges involved in creating one from ME3's aftermath.

 

But that's just my opinion, and I could also be wrong.

 

[Iakus]

 

That was said before painting themselves into a corner with ME3's endings though. If you're going to do a sequel, the options are now somewhat limited. You either have to roll with a single ending being imported into the sequel or having the results of three ending choices meet in the middle. Synthesis in particular throws a wrench in the works.

 

 

I don't deny they painted themselves into a corner.  At this point there's little option than to climb out a window.

 

 

 

I'm not sure there would be enough interest in an alternate timeline where Shepard and the Reapers don't exist. No matter what Bioware does it is going to get a hefty amount of criticism at this point, but I think going that route risks a bit more backlash than the others. Most fans seem to want a sequel, even if they aren't considering the challenges involved in creating one from ME3's aftermath.

But that's just my opinion, and I could also be wrong.

 

As I keep mentioning:  Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights are the same world, but have nothing to do with each other.  I'm sure there'd be grumbling, but still plenty of interest.

[Ctoagu]

As I keep mentioning:  Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights are the same world, but have nothing to do with each other.  I'm sure there'd be grumbling, but still plenty of interest.

 

I haven't played Baldur's Gate and only just got started with NWN, but I don't think that their endgames are designed in such a way that one invalidates the other's significance. Mass Effect 3 took things past the Godzilla Threshold - the Reapers were here, and they were everywhere. Hell, the CAT6 mercs were even treated as a comparative joke in-universe when the Citadel DLC rolled around.

 

Anyway, my problem with seeing a new game set before ME3's ending isn't that the new protagonist's efforts are just going to be overshadowed by Shepard's - it's the fact that the whole galaxy is still slated for the Reaper apocalypse, and I'll be left feeling like I just made a tiny splash in the midst of a building tsunami. It's not "Oh, this guy's doing jack squat compared to Shep", it's "What's the point? Everything's going to go to Reaper-hell in a matter of time anyway." You can't really just wipe such a big part of the trilogy out of existence for the next game and expect me to not feel like it's still waiting around the corner.

 

If the timeline has advanced beyond the endings, then it'll actually feel like a fresh start in the series, without its baggage sitting behind us rather than over our heads. A sequel can still be an indirect sequel, like a new series set within the same universe.

[Iakus]

I haven't played Baldur's Gate and only just got started with NWN, but I don't think that their endgames are designed in such a way that one invalidates the other's significance. Mass Effect 3 took things past the Godzilla Threshold - the Reapers were here, and they were everywhere. Hell, the CAT6 mercs were even treated as a comparative joke in-universe when the Citadel DLC rolled around.

 

Anyway, my problem with seeing a new game set before ME3's ending isn't that the new protagonist's efforts are just going to be overshadowed by Shepard's - it's the fact that the whole galaxy is still slated for the Reaper apocalypse, and I'll be left feeling like I just made a tiny splash in the midst of a building tsunami. It's not "Oh, this guy's doing jack squat compared to Shep", it's "What's the point? Everything's going to go to Reaper-hell in a matter of time anyway." You can't really just wipe such a big part of the trilogy out of existence for the next game and expect me to not feel like it's still waiting around the corner.

 

If the timeline has advanced beyond the endings, then it'll actually feel like a fresh start in the series, without its baggage sitting behind us rather than over our heads. A sequel can still be an indirect sequel, like a new series set within the same universe.

 

And this is why I say, ignore the trilogy.  Shepard's story is that story.  This is a different one.  One without Shepard or Reapers.  Just like Neverwinter Nights doesn't have Bhaalspawn, John Irenicus, or an Iron Crisis.  This story isn't slated for a Reaper apocalypse because in this story there are no Reapers

[Tonymac]

Simple, you make the endings mean different things.

The Catalyst lied through omission of some of the facts, the reason WHY it was so obsessed with making organics and synthetics co-exist is because the Leviathans couldn't stop them destroying each-other, which meant they had no slaves. Synthesis links every being in the galaxy neurally and therefore with the Leviathan's natural ability to control other races they are linked to; it explains why everyone is so unaturally happy- they are all under Leviathan control.

Control "The many will have a say in their future."
The many simply ask the Reapers to leave once everything is repaired.

Destroy, as Shepard survived the Catalyst was mistaken about the Synthetics being destroyed.

Therefore Synthesis and Refuse become "Reapers win" and are omitted.

While Destroy and Control lead to the same results. With the variable of an immortal Shepard or a human one if you wish.

That's how I'd do it.

I can roll with that, but I am interested to see how Bioware dances around the fact that the endings are totally divergent.  How will they smooth this over?  I like your idea though.

[Dragoonlordz]

If they use a different galaxy calling it Mass Effect 4 is in my opinion false advertising, it would be a spin off ... which would still leave the question how to actually do Mass Effect 4 (not that the solution isn't obvious, canonize destroy).

 

Well if you believe it would constitute false advertising then I think your wrong but your entitled to your opinion. Given that I think your wrong on that aspect there would be no question to answer with regards to ME4 in my mind. We will have to wait and see what they do however I am 100% certain they will not retcon the ending, not when there are ways around requiring such like the example I gave. They I believe are more likely to pick an option that does not retcon before they pick one that would. Time will tell which direction they head in though much like the IDT, I am pretty sure they will not retcon the endings in ME4 much like they did not in the extended cut DLC.

[FraQ]

The Shepard trilogy was just a fictional tale that Grandpa Alien was telling his Alien Grandson on Alien planet X01S23Y77.

 

Didn't you guys see the Epilogue!?

 

 

 

 

Seriously though... IT or bust.

 

Eff those endings man... >_<

[Fufunette]

Those endings are genious.... But whatever you say, Bioware doesn't read us anymore, thanks to haters...

 

Whatever, people who don't like ME3 endings should play the trilogy again, or ask someone for answers as I did.

[IST]

Sounds fine to me.

 

#destroyalways

[Pateu]

The second option goes against everything they've been saying since ME2:  that there is no canon

 

But that's a lie.

 

If you had a human council at the end of ME1 you still get a joint council in ME3.

[AlanC9]

There's a ton of a difference between knowing the Reapers went poof for good, absolutely annihilated and knowing they're out there, nearly undamaged.
 
Sure, you asked them to leave, but do you have any guarantee they will stay gone? 
 
The galaxy would just live in terror.

Good. My Sheplyst wants to give them an incentive to develop faster. The Citadel races seem to have stagnated for millennia before humans came along. It's hard to avoid the conclusion that asari just aren't very bright, since the Protheans handed them civilization on a platter and they still developed very slowly compared to humans. But what's the salarians' excuse?

[AlanC9]

The second route would be to anoint one of the three original endings as the sole recognized import and build your sequel around it. The other two endings are still canon if you chose them, but they don't have their own sequel to explore the aftermath.

Having proposed exactly this for the DA series (over the DR issue), I'd be happy with this approach in ME.

[Iakus]

The Shepard trilogy was just a fictional tale that Grandpa Alien was telling his Alien Grandson on Alien planet X01S23Y77.

 

Didn't you guys see the Epilogue!?

 

 

Bioware's greatest out for ignoring the endings

[SwobyJ]

Not all parts of the story and ending are to be taken literally.

 

'Retcon' may be based on point of view of the player, and the decisions they made throughout the game.