1680 réponses à ce sujet

[Steppenwolf]

By leaving MW and never returning your already making what Shepard did in the trilogy pointless since it defeats the purpose of saving the MW in the first place, Bioware may as well start a new IP instead. The MW still has a lot more to offer in terms of lore and story, leaving the galaxy is just unnecessary and it won't make the issue's of the ending go away.

That doesn't make any sense. Ignoring the Milky Way doesn't change anything you did in the trilogy. It leaves your choices entirely intact, respecting your galaxy-state. Saving the Milky Way was the point of saving the Milky Way. That story is complete and going to the Andromeda galaxy takes away nothing.
 
 

Most choices in the trilogy only affect a few individuals (not the entire galaxy) and have been resolved. The next game is obviously going to reference events to the trilogy in some degree. So Its not far fetched that some of them may be integrated into side quests so having the genophage or the geth brought up in one of them is a possibility.

So just write out major races and write around major plot points? That's what you want? A story of vagueries and side-stepping just to avoid a new setting?

[Torgette]

That doesn't make any sense. Ignoring the Milky Way doesn't change anything you did in the trilogy. It leaves your choices entirely intact, respecting your galaxy-state. Saving the Milky Way was the point of saving the Milky Way. That story is complete and going to the Andromeda galaxy takes away nothing.
 
 

So just write out major races and write around major plot points? That's what you want? A story of vagueries and side-stepping just to avoid a new setting?

 

Well if we want to feel the affects of what we did at the end of ME3 in Andromeda, then write in that the Reapers were also a threat to Andromeda OR the ark uses reaper tech recovered from the war. Lowest common denominator of ME3's ending is that Reaper tech is available and the Reaper threat is over.

[ElitePinecone]

That doesn't make any sense. Ignoring the Milky Way doesn't change anything you did in the trilogy. It leaves your choices entirely intact, respecting your galaxy-state. Saving the Milky Way was the point of saving the Milky Way. That story is complete and going to the Andromeda galaxy takes away nothing.

 

There's no point in telling that to Drone, I've been saying the same thing for the better part of a year with absolutely no success.

 

If or when the game is revealed to take place in Andromeda, people will just have to deal with it. Having the same discussion again and again and again is incredibly boring. 

[JeffZero]

By leaving MW and never returning your already making what Shepard did in the trilogy pointless since it defeats the purpose of saving the MW in the first place

I will never, ever agree with this philosophy.

Shepard saved the Milky Way. I saw it with my own eyes. My choices throughout the trilogy helped shape the circumstances. And then it happened. I don't need a direct sequel to confirm it for me. Nothing in the past three years since ME3's ending has had me in doubt that it occurred.

I get the desire to have a direct Milky Way continuation, but I find the insinuation that an Andromeda sidestep somehow erases things outright rather... hyperbolic.

Edit: ...it appears I wasn't the first to address this.

[Sion1138]

I will never, ever agree with this philosophy.

Shepard saved the Milky Way. I saw it with my own eyes. My choices throughout the trilogy helped shape the circumstances. And then it happened. I don't need a direct sequel to confirm it for me. Nothing in the past three years since ME3's ending has had me in doubt that it occurred.

I get the desire to have a direct Milky Way continuation, but I find the insinuation that an Andromeda sidestep somehow erases things outright rather... hyperbolic.

Edit: ...it appears I wasn't the first to address this.

 

It's because the trilogy has set up a strong expectation of continuity, and the expectation remains regardless of whatever proclamation the developer has made.

 

It will necessarily be so, that a number people will feel that way, until the new game is released.

 

In other words, it is the association of continuity itself with Mass Effect.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Well if we want to feel the affects of what we did at the end of ME3 in Andromeda, then write in that the Reapers were also a threat to Andromeda OR the ark uses reaper tech recovered from the war. Lowest common denominator of ME3's ending is that Reaper tech is available and the Reaper threat is over.

This could work well. It would mean Mass Relays, which are one of the icons of the franchise, would still be around since the Reapers reaped Androneda. And it would explain the huge leap in our cycle's technology, since we either had years or decades to study and build Reaper-tier stuff or the Reapers simply helped us. As for the divergent endings and choices, have it so say the lines in Synthesis disappeared in time and the races who could be wiped out have stragglers. 

[Drone223]

That doesn't make any sense. Ignoring the Milky Way doesn't change anything you did in the trilogy. It leaves your choices entirely intact, respecting your galaxy-state. Saving the Milky Way was the point of saving the Milky Way. That story is complete and going to the Andromeda galaxy takes away nothing.
 

It does leaving the galaxy is just defeatist and a huge disservice to the lore. The whole concept of exploring new settings can easily be done without leaving the galaxy since 99% of it is unexplored.

 

So just write out major races and write around major plot points? That's what you want? A story of vagueries and side-stepping just to avoid a new setting?

 

Except that's what going to happen by leaving the milky way galaxy it removes any scene of continuity, staying on the other hand keeps continuity of the series.

 

[Drone223]

*snip*
 

Leaving the galaxy will not cause the issue's of the endings to go away they'll still be there, and sooner or later Bioware are going to have to do something about them.

 

How does it keep continuity if it discards our galaxy-states? Your argument is entirely illogical. You say the only way for them to avoid crapping all over our choices is for them to crap all over our choices.
You're entirely emotional and not using your brain AT ALL.

 

Except I never said such a thing.

[Sion1138]

I would have meshed all three conclusions into one, where the Reapers would have been destroyed but where the overarching goal of the game would be to restore them, control them and achieve the final synthesis.

[goishen]

Leaving the galaxy will not cause the issue's of the endings to go away they'll still be there, and sooner or later Bioware are going to have to do something about them.

 

 

 

No.  They won't.

 

300+ years there, 300+ years back...  ==  600+ years that we could have blown ourselves to smithereens.

 

Call it anything you like, just don't try and make it make sense.

[Drone223]

No.  They won't.

 

300+ years there, 300+ years back...  ==  600+ years that we could have blown ourselves to smithereens.

 

Call it anything you like, just don't try and make it make sense.

That's called bad/contrived writing.

[Steppenwolf]

That's called bad/contrived writing.

Just saying something doesn't make it true.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Just saying something doesn't make it true.

No, they're right. Going "And the people of the Milky Way killed themselves while the ark was gone" is bad writing. 

[Steppenwolf]

No, they're right. Going "And the people of the Milky Way killed themselves while the ark was gone" is bad writing.

We're killing ourselves now. Are we just bad writing?

[7thGate]

We're killing ourselves now. Are we just bad writing?

 

No, mostly because we're not killing ourselves now.  Humanity has a very high chance of still existing in 600 years, and we currently only have one planet; having us implode across an entire galaxy in that time would be highly contrived and silly.

[BabyPuncher]

Leaving the galaxy will not cause the issue's of the endings to go away they'll still be there, and sooner or later Bioware are going to have to do something about them.

 

Agreed. These problems aren't just going to go away because BioWare covers their ears and shouts "LA LA LA."

 

If they're smart, they'll bite the bullet and do whatever they need to do to stomp that turd of a ending into the ground and put it behind them. That ending has ruined enough. The last thing they need is it hanging on and refusing to die for the next 10 years while they clumsily and ineffectively try to write around it, inevitably concluded with some pathetically lame excuse as to why Synthesis had no effect after all.

 

If we're going to have a pathetically lame excuse, let's do it now and get it over with, and then move the hell on.

[BabyPuncher]

Shepard saved the Milky Way. I saw it with my own eyes. My choices throughout the trilogy helped shape the circumstances.

 

This sure would be a lot more compelling if the ending wasn't an idiotically contrived mess in which it's pointless to say anyone 'saved' or did anything.

 

We might as well just say the galaxy was 'saved' because the faeries waved their magic wands. That's just as sensible as anything else.

[Steppenwolf]

This sure would be a lot more compelling if the ending wasn't an idiotically contrived mess in which it's pointless to say anyone 'saved' or did anything.
 
We might as well just say the galaxy was 'saved' because the faeries waved their magic wands. That's just as sensible as anything else.

Idiotic though the ending may be, it was Shepard that saved the galaxy and our choices determined how it happened and in what state he left the Milky Way. Saying that changing the setting makes the trilogy pointless is absurdly absurd and illogical. Saying that we have to continue in the Milky Way just because, despite the obvious reasons why it would be a massive can of worms is purely kneejerk sentimentality, nostalgia. Nothing more. Geeks hate change so the companies that actually make the content we love to complain about have to shove change down our throats because we're too stupid to realize that rehashing the same thing over and over is terrible.

[Steppenwolf]

No, mostly because we're not killing ourselves now.  Humanity has a very high chance of still existing in 600 years, and we currently only have one planet; having us implode across an entire galaxy in that time would be highly contrived and silly.

We are killing ourselves now. We fight wars over made up causes, we poison our water and air, we murder each other in the streets, we make nuclear weapons because other people have nuclear weapons. Humanity is a ticking time bomb.

[Steppenwolf]

Agreed. These problems aren't just going to go away because BioWare covers their ears and shouts "LA LA LA."
 
If they're smart, they'll bite the bullet and do whatever they need to do to stomp that turd of a ending into the ground and put it behind them. That ending has ruined enough. The last thing they need is it hanging on and refusing to die for the next 10 years while they clumsily and ineffectively try to write around it, inevitably concluded with some pathetically lame excuse as to why Synthesis had no effect after all.
 
If we're going to have a pathetically lame excuse, let's do it now and get it over with, and then move the hell on.

Yeah, just one more bitter pill to swallow. One more round of terrible writing will make everyone forget all about terrible writing. It's not like gamers, and consumers in general, are a fickle lot. People will keep bending over and taking it from EA, right?

[Andrew Waples]

We are killing ourselves now. We fight wars over made up causes, we poison our water and air, we murder each other in the streets, we make nuclear weapons because other people have nuclear weapons. Humanity is a ticking time bomb.

Your just all full of joy aren't you...if humanity is a ticking time bomb we wouldn't be writing in this forum now would we? Given your examples.

[BabyPuncher]

First of all, you're not going to be able to come up with a sensible answer as to what Shepard did at the climax of ME 3 to save the galaxy. Because there isn't one.

 

Secondly, the idea that the story either abandons the Milky Way forever or is 'rehashing the same thing' is flatly stupid. The idea that the only reason someone might be concerned that pretending the Milky Way doesn't exist and whatever civilization we're dealing with in the next game exists in a bubble could cause very serious narrative problems is only 'nostalgia' is flatly stupid.

[BabyPuncher]

Yeah, just one more bitter pill to swallow. One more round of terrible writing will make everyone forget all about terrible writing. It's not like gamers, and consumers in general, are a fickle lot. People will keep bending over and taking it from EA, right?

 

It's a pill that's going to come sooner or later. And at least this is one we've all been expecting. Nobody expects BioWare to be able to write satisfying conclusions to the ending. We've all known whatever they come up with is going to be garbage. We've known it for years. They're either going to canonize an ending and ****** people off or come up with some ridiculous excuse why none of it mattered and ****** people off. 

 

Better that they don't let the old story ruin the new one. No, it won't make everyone forget, but it will let them move on. Smarter to accept the inevitable contrivances and the plot holes, nod at how stupid the whole thing is, and let it be buried as it deserves.

 

Kill it now. 

[Steppenwolf]

Your just all full of joy aren't you...if humanity is a ticking time bomb we wouldn't be writing in this forum now would we? Given your examples.

That doesn't make any sense.

First of all, you're not going to be able to come up with a sensible answer as to what Shepard did at the climax of ME 3 to save the galaxy. Because there isn't one.
Secondly, the idea that the story either abandons the Milky Way forever or is 'rehashing the same thing' is flatly stupid. The idea that the only reason someone might be concerned that pretending the Milky Way doesn't exist and whatever civilization we're dealing with in the next game exists in a bubble could cause very serious narrative problems is only 'nostalgia' is flatly stupid.

Potential problems are a bigger concern than real ones? You said yourself that there is no salvaging the ending of ME3 but you're an advocate for taking the **** and smearing it all over your face. That is flatly stupid.

It's a pill that's going to come sooner or later. And at least this is one we've all been expecting. Nobody expects BioWare to be able to write satisfying conclusions to the ending. We've all known whatever they come up with is going to be garbage. We've known it for years. They're either going to canonize an ending and ****** people off or come up with some ridiculous excuse why none of it mattered and ****** people off. 
Better that they don't let the old story ruin the new one. No, it won't make everyone forget, but it will let them move on. Smarter to accept the inevitable contrivances and the plot holes, nod at how stupid the whole thing is, and let it be buried as it deserves.
Kill it now.

No one has moved on from ME3 now so why would they move on because more bad writing is thrown at them? It makes exactly zero sense.

[Mcfly616]

Canonizing ME3 ending > Andromeda/Ark crap