447 réponses à ce sujet

[ElitePinecone]

I don't think that a Mass Effect prequel is likely for some time, because they've created this setting and to go backwards in time would be to contract it (as you rightly pointed out); they've made all these races and it would be a shame not to put them to good use. But agency, I think, has nothing to do with it. They could very well make an excellent prequel game with a fresh storyline and a great deal of player agency. But they probably won't.

 

This is a great post and I agree with everything, particularly this last bit. 

 

A prequel game is entirely possible - and it looked like the original plan was to do a prequel or midquel - but given that the prevailing player sentiment seems to be in favour of something set after ME3, that's what they've decided to do. There's nothing standing in the way of a prequel as far as player agency or storytelling is concerned, but many fans seem adamant that they want a sequel (and fair enough, I guess - I'm sympathetic to the idea that they want to keep moving forward)

 

That does introduce a much more challenging narrative situation, in the sense that anything set after ME3 in the Milky Way has to either deal with the consequences of Shepard's choices, or ignore them entirely. I don't think either is a satisfactory outcome at all, which (IMO) makes a new setting, maybe even a new galaxy, almost required if they want to:

 

1. preserve the canon of the player's choices over three games (insofar as it applies only to the Milky Way, which will probably not be featured again as a major location)

and 2. create a new range of species, conflicts, areas, characters, and stories to tell.

 

From ME3, and particularly from the Extended Cut, it was made extremely clear that all of the story arcs in Shepard's trilogy have been wrapped up. Some fans keep posting about wanting to see the consequences of their choices on the galaxy (or reunite with Liara, blah blah blah) but to me it seems obvious that Bioware already did this with the new ending slides, and especially the Citadel DLC. All of that is over now, and I doubt we'll be seeing much of it again in the future.

 

A new galaxy is the perfect opportunity to take the existing foundations of the IP (the races, technology, and some iconic motifs like N7 and the Mako) and put them in an entirely new setting, with new stories to tell. The alternative would be a tired retread of familiar places, stories and characters - which seems like a bad thing to do when you've got an eager new team and a new generation of consoles. 

[MrMrPendragon]

Problem.  How do we set a game at the same time as ME3 or after ME3 and not have it subject to one of three big decisions made at the end of ME3 that would really set the course for a future game. 

 

Or they could just man up and pick one ending to go with.

[Iakus]

Or they could just man up and pick one ending to go with.

So much for "there is no canon"

[ElitePinecone]

Or they could just man up and pick one ending to go with.

 

That completely defeats the purpose of offering the player choices. 

 

No way that's going to happen.

[Drone223]

That completely defeats the purpose of offering the player choices. 

 

No way that's going to happen.

They already made Udina the canon councilor so they may as well make a canon ending since it'll give them something to work with for the next title.

[Drone223]

 

 

A new galaxy is the perfect opportunity to take the existing foundations of the IP (the races, technology, and some iconic motifs like N7 and the Mako) and put them in an entirely new setting, with new stories to tell. The alternative would be a tired retread of familiar places, stories and characters - which seems like a bad thing to do when you've got an eager new team and a new generation of consoles. 

Its not, they may as well start a new franchise instead if they even consider it and its completely unnecessary as only 98% of the galaxy is still unexplored and the relay network covers only a small percentage of that. Not to mention most mass relay's are inactive so there is there is still a lot left to explore in the galaxy.

[Memnon]

That completely defeats the purpose of offering the player choices. 

 

No way that's going to happen.

 

If they don't make a prequel, and don't make ME4 set outside the Milky Way, then they have to pick a canon ending. I don't see any way around that - with KOTOR they could go back 4,000 years and create new lore, new characters, etc. without upsetting the balance of the original Star Wars, and without the knowledge that certain characters are going to live to see the movies. With ME4, no matter how far into the future they go, the issue of the ending to ME3 will always be there - are there Reapers around? Do people have green glowy bits? 

[Drone223]

If they don't make a prequel, and don't make ME4 set outside the Milky Way, then they have to pick a canon ending. I don't see any way around that - with KOTOR they could go back 4,000 years and create new lore, new characters, etc. without upsetting the balance of the original Star Wars, and without the knowledge that certain characters are going to live to see the movies. With ME4, no matter how far into the future they go, the issue of the ending to ME3 will always be there - are there Reapers around? Do people have green glowy bits? 

I'd say pick a canon ending get it over with, because trying to avoid a canon will only hurt them later on.

[ElitePinecone]

If they don't make a prequel, and don't make ME4 set outside the Milky Way, then they have to pick a canon ending. I don't see any way around that - with KOTOR they could go back 4,000 years and create new lore, new characters, etc. without upsetting the balance of the original Star Wars, and without the knowledge that certain characters are going to live to see the movies. With ME4, no matter how far into the future they go, the issue of the ending to ME3 will always be there - are there Reapers around? Do people have green glowy bits? 

 

Yes, and the entire point of the Ark Theory - which is what this thread is discussing - is that there will be a new galaxy for the next game. 

 

They already made Udina the canon councilor so they may as well make a canon ending since it'll give them something to work with for the next title.

 

How is "they should make a canon ending since it will give them something to work with for the next title" more sensible than "they should move to a new galaxy since it'll give them something to work with for the next title"? One of those things destroys player canon, makes the entire ME3 ending controversy pointless, and says that Bioware-style choices can be abandoned if they make things too difficult. The other... just changes the setting for the game. 

 

They're both basically methods to achieve the same thing, but I reckon moving to a different area of space is a hell of a lot better than saying the choices they offered in the last game are now irrelevant and non-canon. People were angry at making Udina councilor and retconning the Rachni choice - why would BW do it again, except on a much bigger scale by making everything Shepard did in ME3 mean pretty much nothing?

 

I don't know why you seem to eager to stay in the Milky Way - is it because you want to see the same characters and locations as in Shepard's trilogy? Because by the looks of it that just won't be happening. It all ended with ME3 and the Citadel DLC, period. 

[Memnon]

Yes, and the entire point of the Ark Theory - which is what this thread is discussing - is that there will be a new galaxy for the next game. 

 

I am mostly agreeing with you - I'm okay with ME4 taking place in another galaxy, I don't see any other way to do it. But there is precedence for Bioware picking canon endings. For example, Revan was male and destroyed the Star Forge, and the Jedi Exile female. Barring another galaxy, assuming the possibility of Bioware going against their word, I'll personally take High EMS Destroy as canon ...

[ElitePinecone]

I think for KoTOR though, that was actually mandated by LucasArts, since they wanted to do other things with Revan and the Exile that needed a set canon. 

 

The Mass Effect team) have always maintained that there's no canon beyond what the player decides. 

[Memnon]

I think for KoTOR though, that was actually mandated by LucasArts, since they wanted to do other things with Revan and the Exile that needed a set canon. 

 

The Mass Effect team) have always maintained that there's no canon beyond what the player decides. 

 

I'm not sure if they were mandated by LucasArts to pick a canon - I do know that if you played the TOR MMO, then you actually meet Revan (male) and ... er, I think you speak with the ghost of the Exile. Whether or not that was mandated by LucasArts, I've no idea, but again - the precedence for establishing a canon in order to make a sequel is there

[ElitePinecone]

I believe they actually made a canon for books and other EU products, not a sequel game. LucasArts has never allowed ambiguous characters (like the protagonists of lots of SW video games) that could be different genders or choose different sides of the Force. It was only several years after making Revan a canon lightside male that he appeared in SWTOR.

 

KOTOR 2 already found a way around that by (correctly) letting the player decide Revan's gender and alignment, in a primitive sort of save import.

 

My point was that the Star Wars example isn't all that relevant to Mass Effect, because the latter's developers have always maintained that there is no canon. In books and comics, the authors have always been careful to draw or describe Shepard in a way that doesn't identify a gender, and to keep big player choices out of those side stories. 

[Drone223]

 

How is "they should make a canon ending since it will give them something to work with for the next title" more sensible than "they should move to a new galaxy since it'll give them something to work with for the next title"? One of those things destroys player canon, makes the entire ME3 ending controversy pointless, and says that Bioware-style choices can be abandoned if they make things too difficult. The other... just changes the setting for the game. 

 

They're both basically methods to achieve the same thing, but I reckon moving to a different area of space is a hell of a lot better than saying the choices they offered in the last game are now irrelevant and non-canon. People were angry at making Udina councilor and retconning the Rachni choice - why would BW do it again, except on a much bigger scale by making everything Shepard did in ME3 mean pretty much nothing?

 

I don't know why you seem to eager to stay in the Milky Way - is it because you want to see the same characters and locations as in Shepard's trilogy? Because by the looks of it that just won't be happening. It all ended with ME3 and the Citadel DLC, period. 

The only thing being made canon is the ending everything else can be left alone since most choices only affect a hand full of individuals not the galaxy as a whole. Choices such as the genophage. geth and rachni can be implement with an app. like DA: keep. The whole idea of moving to another galaxy makes the whole concept of trying to save it pointless why should I care about a galaxy that we fought very hard to save only to never return to it again, if that's the case you may as well let the reapers win because everything that Shepard and co did to save it would mean nothing.

 

As setting the next game in the same galaxy please don't put words in my mouth. At what point did I say for the next game I'd want to play as characters from the trilogy or return to places from the original trilogy? Read my comment again 98% of the galaxy is unexplored there is a lot of left to explore in the milky way and leaving the galaxy forever is just unnecessary.

[ElitePinecone]

The whole idea of moving to another galaxy makes the whole concept of trying to save it pointless why should I care about a galaxy that we fought very hard to save only to never return to it again, if that's the case you may as well let the reapers win because everything that Shepard and co did to save it would mean nothing.

 

No, the Milky Way would keep going in the state you left it in after ME3 - a state that was explored further in the Extended Cut ending slides. Not knowing every single detail of what happened after that doesn't make the trilogy's story "pointless". At some point people are just going to have to accept that we will not be seeing the future for every single storyline, character and location from Shepard's story. An ending doesn't make what came before it meaningless. 

 

Even if NME somehow takes place in our galaxy, we won't be seeing Shepard's squadmates again. Those characters are finished and done with, as Bioware have been unsubtly reminding us for nearly two years - but again, their stories aren't pointless, they've just ended. People might not be happy that they won't get more content with those characters, but Bioware Montreal have moved on to other things in the Mass Effect IP.

 

Most if not all of the locations are new, too. We've seen a new "Citadel" that's clearly not the old one, and it seems like most of the game will be spent exploring uncharted worlds.

 

So... what is the functional difference between a game set in the Milky Way that doesn't have locations or characters from previous games, and a game set in an entire new galaxy that lets them do much more interesting things with new alien species and a "stranger in a strange land" vibe? If the expectation is that NME will be full of cameos from prior games and heaps of storylines that are carried over from Shepard's trilogy, that will almost certainly result in disappointment. 

[Vazgen]

Races are the difference. Unless you follow the ark theory which makes members of all species populate that new galaxy and establish the same organizations (N7) which should take quite some time. Enough to make everyone forget about the Reaper War and remove its effects.

[ElitePinecone]

A game set in the Milky Way that disregards the ending choices because "they wore off" is just as bad as retconning them straight out. That, more than anything else, makes our decisions and story over three games feel pointless. 

 

Either what Shepard did was important, or it wasn't.

 

Either player choices matter, or they don't. 

 

ME3 changed the galaxy enormously - to the extent that a Synthesis galaxy is immensely different to the other two. Turning right around and saying "hey this is too hard let's just skip ahead 10,000 years and make it all irrelevant" is a pretty ridiculous idea. 

[MrMrPendragon]

That completely defeats the purpose of offering the player choices. 

 

No way that's going to happen.

 

Pssh "player choices" lol

 

Should be "here's the story we want to tell, now you can fondle and tweak it, but we get final say. That's the bottomline because Bioware said so"

[Drone223]

No, the Milky Way would keep going in the state you left it in after ME3 - a state that was explored further in the Extended Cut ending slides. Not knowing every single detail of what happened after that doesn't make the trilogy's story "pointless". At some point people are just going to have to accept that we will not be seeing the future for every single storyline, character and location from Shepard's story. An ending doesn't make what came before it meaningless. 
 
Even if NME somehow takes place in our galaxy, we won't be seeing Shepard's squadmates again. Those characters are finished and done with, as Bioware have been unsubtly reminding us for nearly two years - but again, their stories aren't pointless, they've just ended. People might not be happy that they won't get more content with those characters, but Bioware Montreal have moved on to other things in the Mass Effect IP.
 
Most if not all of the locations are new, too. We've seen a new "Citadel" that's clearly not the old one, and it seems like most of the game will be spent exploring uncharted worlds.
 
So... what is the functional difference between a game set in the Milky Way that doesn't have locations or characters from previous games, and a game set in an entire new galaxy that lets them do much more interesting things with new alien species and a "stranger in a strange land" vibe? If the expectation is that NME will be full of cameos from prior games and heaps of storylines that are carried over from Shepard's trilogy, that will almost certainly result in disappointment.

Leaving the galaxy forever does make saving it meaningless as the investment people put into the setting is just wasted, no point saving it if it isn't revisited again, just let the reapers win instead since the players will never come back to it again. Also the EC slides only show glimpse of what the galaxy is like after the war, there not the end all be all state of the galaxy, as a lot can still happen after the war e.g. new galactic powers rise and fall, new hostile species within the galaxy are encountered etc. It's just silly to assume that the galaxy will stay they way it's depicted in the EC slides forever.

With my point on using the uncharted regions of the milky way as the setting for the next game your still putting words in my mouth. I never said anything about characters/location from the trilogy coming back in the next game. I said there's no need to leave the galaxy as exploring the uncharted regions of the galaxy will achieve the same result of exploring unknown locations.

[Heimdall]

Leaving the galaxy forever does make saving it meaningless as the investment people put into the setting is just wasted, no point saving it if it isn't revisited again, just let the reapers win instead since the players will never come back to it again.

By that logic, every story that ever ends, or moves on from a given location, is pointless. Leaving the Galaxy doesn't make the saving it meaningless, it just means that story is moving on to new things. That's it. Yes, anything can happen if you use your imagination after the EC, that doesn't mean those hypotheticals need to be explored or should be explored beyond the details given in the EC just because you think the idea of things staying that way is silly. We were given a glimpse of the future of the Galaxy as Shepard has shaped it, there's no need for more, especially if it comes at the cost of overriding player choice.

Exploring unknown regions is completely beside the point. The point is avoiding starting a new chapter in Mass Effect by crushing the idea that player choice matters, which a game exploring the Milky Way's unexplored regions doesn't address at all. But I believe what ElitePinecone was getting at is that, if no characters or locations will be returning, then what is so darned desirable about staying in the Milky Way that makes moving outward such a loss? The setting we knew is gone either way, it will be made new wherever it is set, Ark Theory is just the scenario that avoids crushing anyone's canon.

[goishen]

A game set in the Milky Way that disregards the ending choices because "they wore off" is just as bad as retconning them straight out. That, more than anything else, makes our decisions and story over three games feel pointless. 

 

Either what Shepard did was important, or it wasn't.

 

Either player choices matter, or they don't. 

 

ME3 changed the galaxy enormously - to the extent that a Synthesis galaxy is immensely different to the other two. Turning right around and saying "hey this is too hard let's just skip ahead 10,000 years and make it all irrelevant" is a pretty ridiculous idea. 

 

Ehhh, even supernovas take time to show up in our sky, and we might have even felt the effects of them yet.  So, for you to say that the mass relays being destroyed one after another was a galaxy wide H bomb is just ludicrous.  And that's a sun exploding.  You're trying to tell me that a mass relay has more power than a sun?  I don't think so.  Or even a galaxy wide synthesis device?  I mean, ehhh.  The closest star to us, besides our own sun is I believe alpha centauri.   And that's 4 light years away.  The numbers only go up from there. 

 

If you're trying to say that the mass relays used eezo to burn themselves out thereby causing waves of destruction at FTL speeds...  Okay, maybe.  But even that would only go so far before it became a giant wave of nothingness.  Entropy can very easily be defined in space.  At least, IMHO.

[Drone223]

By that logic, every story that ever ends, or moves on from a given location, is pointless. Leaving the Galaxy doesn't make the saving it meaningless, it just means that story is moving on to new things. That's it. Yes, anything can happen if you use your imagination after the EC, that doesn't mean those hypotheticals need to be explored or should be explored beyond the details given in the EC just because you think the idea of things staying that way is silly. We were given a glimpse of the future of the Galaxy as Shepard has shaped it, there's no need for more, especially if it comes at the cost of overriding player choice.

Exploring unknown regions is completely beside the point. The point is avoiding starting a new chapter in Mass Effect by crushing the idea that player choice matters, which a game exploring the Milky Way's unexplored regions doesn't address at all. But I believe what ElitePinecone was getting at is that, if no characters or locations will be returning, then what is so darned desirable about staying in the Milky Way that makes moving outward such a loss? The setting we knew is gone either way, it will be made new wherever it is set, Ark Theory is just the scenario that avoids crushing anyone's canon.

The EC slides can only show so much about the state of the galaxy, that not exploring the galaxy after the war be it 10 or 300 years after it would just be a huge waste of potential and investment. Leaving the galaxy also means ditching most if not all the existing lore, its a lot easier to make a new game buy using what is already there and add to it then starting from scratch. You can't just take all the species from the MW put them in another galaxy tell the players that the franchise is leaving the MW forever and slap "Mass Effect" on the title there has to be a sense of familiarity. Its also worth noting that eventually people would want to re-visit places from the trilogy at some point in future ME titles (could be in 7th or 8th game of the franchise) so abandoning those places forever will just make people upset.

 

There will only be one thing being made canon and its the endings, all the choices players made in the trilogy can be left to the players interpretation. The major choice can be implemented with a DA: keep like app. were the those choices can result in unique side quest related to them. Trying to avoid the endings will only come back to hunt Bioware as its just better to get the endings over and done with since no matter what Bioware does people are going to get upset, so the sooner the endings are dealt the better.

[Heimdall]

The EC slides can only show so much about the state of the galaxy, that not exploring the galaxy after the war be it 10 or 300 years after it would just be a huge waste of potential and investment. Leaving the galaxy also means ditching most if not all the existing lore, its a lot easier to make a new game buy using what is already there and add to it then starting from scratch. You can't just take all the species from the MW put them in another galaxy tell the players that the franchise is leaving the MW forever and slap "Mass Effect" on the title there has to be a sense of familiarity. Its also worth noting that eventually people would want to re-visit places from the trilogy at some point in future ME titles (could be in 7th or 8th game of the franchise) so abandoning those places forever will just make people upset.

What potential? Really, what potential are they missing out on? They aren't dumping the lore. The lore still exists. The history of mass effect still happened, the centuries of inter species interaction still happened, relations between species will just be dramatically changed inevitably whether the new game is in the Milky Way or not. The Milky Way left behind in the wake of ME3 and the inevitable time jump will only be marginally more familiar than a new galaxy, the entire political-social order that defined the setting of the trilogy has been upheaved (In one of three ways). So no, the familiarity argument doesn't really work. Neither does "people will want to revisit places" because the same can be said of any game and that doesn't make it necessary or the best choice for the series going forward. Just because people like old places doesn't mean they won't come to love new ones that they haven't had a chance to see yet.
 

There will only be one thing being made canon and its the endings, all the choices players made in the trilogy can be left to the players interpretation. The major choice can be implemented with a DA: keep like app. were the those choices can result in unique side quest related to them. Trying to avoid the endings will only come back to hunt Bioware as its just better to get the endings over and done with since no matter what Bioware does people are going to get upset, so the sooner the endings are dealt the better.

Bioware did deal with the endings, it's called the EC. And there's absolutely no need for them to address them further.

[dreamgazer]

So much for "there is no canon"

 

Oh, Mass Effect's got a canon. Always has, always will.

[Drone223]

What potential? Really, what potential are they missing out on? They aren't dumping the lore. The lore still exists. The history of mass effect still happened, the centuries of inter species interaction still happened, relations between species will just be dramatically changed inevitably whether the new game is in the Milky Way or not. The Milky Way left behind in the wake of ME3 and the inevitable time jump will only be marginally more familiar than a new galaxy, the entire political-social order that defined the setting of the trilogy has been upheaved (In one of three ways). So no, the familiarity argument doesn't really work. Neither does "people will want to revisit places" because the same can be said of any game and that doesn't make it necessary or the best choice for the series going forward. Just because people like old places doesn't mean they won't come to love new ones that they haven't had a chance to see yet.
 
Bioware did deal with the endings, it's called the EC. And there's absolutely no need for them to address them further.

That doesn't mean there will be some familiarity, there will still be a system alliance, a N7 program, justicar's STG etc. they'll be changes but at the same time they'll still be familiar to the players. Again the slides in the EC only give us a small glimpse into the galaxy after the war, there is still a lot left in the MW to explore and the stories can be more personal rather than ones that shape the galaxy. An earlier post made by durasteel sums up why leaving the MW forever is a bad idea.

 

I think that refusing to ever revisit the entire galaxy of the Mass Effect trilogy sets a much more rigid canon than anything else on the table. You're basically saying that, as an in-universe truism, the whole Milky Way should be dead and gone, inaccessible to PCs, NPCs or their descendants from ME4 onward, forever. 

 

If you want to mandate that players will never again be able to see or visit any place or character from the previous games, then your position makes "canon Refuse" seem moderate by comparison. Many fans expressed dismay over the extensive devastation of the galaxy in ME3, but you want to take it to an ultimate extreme and throw away whatever's left. Might as well give up and let the Reapers have it.

 

The Reapers were trying to destroy the galaxy. Not physically--there would still be chunks of dirt, ice, gas and fire swirling around a supermassive black hole like there were before, but the cultures, civilizations, and character of the place would be wiped away. Shepard was trying to save the galaxy in the same context. If, after the conclusion of his trilogy, the galaxy is so completely bollocksed that no more stories can be told in it, then Shepard is a complete failure as a character. That would be the worst indictment of the ending of ME3--that no matter what your character does, you inevitably lose the whole galaxy forever.