Canonizing ME3 ending > Andromeda/Ark crap
They move on because the ending is over with. it's done. It's in the past. The writers don't have to spend the next decade whimpering over if the story they want to tell makes sense alongside the super-duper advanced Synthesis humanity or whatever. They don't have to be chained to it anymore.
Either this '****,' as you say, is dealt with and buried now, or it stays to rot and fester for the next few games. It's not going away.
They move on because the ending is over with. it's done. It's in the past. The writers don't have to spend the next decade whimpering over if the story they want to tell makes sense alongside the super-duper advanced Synthesis humanity or whatever. They don't have to be chained to it anymore.
Either this '****,' as you say, is dealt with and buried now, or it stays to rot and fester for the next few games. It's not going away.
Disregarding every player's choices in the franchise that was built around the idea of giving players choices that carried weight is better than leaving our choices intact? You guys don't even see how illogical and emotional you are.
so, in your opinion, disregarding 2/3's of the player base in order to have a solid foundation for the future of the series is the same as disregarding everything entirely (choices, the setting itself)? Making everything a " what if" is better? That's quite illogical.
We may have to agree to disagree if that's the case.
They're not going to be able to make the Milky Way a bubble that is completely isolated (and for all intents and purposes, obliterated) from the Mass Effect Universe.
Something as simple as bringing in a visiting character has the deal with the issue of if their face is a mass of stupid glowing circuits or not.
The lore is so embedded in the Milky Way. They'd be leaving behind a substantial part of the established fiction if they left it for good. It would be the very definition of a reboot.
so, in your opinion, disregarding 2/3's of the player base in order to have a solid foundation for the future of the series is the same as disregarding everything entirely (choices, the setting itself)? Making everything a " what if" is better? That's quite illogical.
We may have to agree to disagree if that's the case.
What is this 2/3 figure?
They're not going to be able to make the Milky Way a bubble that is completely isolated (and for all intents and purposes, obliterated) from the Mass Effect Universe.
Why not?
The trip on the Andromeda Galaxy is a one-way trip through a wormhole. The mission is to take an "Ark-ship" of all of the known intelligent races of the Milky Way and colonize new worlds, far removed from the current Reaper threat.
There. Done.
The lore is so embedded in the Milky Way. They'd be leaving behind a substantial part of the established fiction if they left it for good. It would be the very definition of a reboot.
No it wouldn't. That's not what a reboot is at all. Changing the setting does not a reboot make.
Reboot (fiction)
In serial fiction, to reboot means to discard all continuity in an established series in order to recreate its characters, timeline and backstory from the beginning.
http://en.wikipedia....eboot_(fiction)
They move on because the ending is over with. it's done. It's in the past. The writers don't have to spend the next decade whimpering over if the story they want to tell makes sense alongside the super-duper advanced Synthesis humanity or whatever. They don't have to be chained to it anymore.
Either this '****,' as you say, is dealt with and buried now, or it stays to rot and fester for the next few games. It's not going away.
I don't think that's really accurate - the entire point of going to Andromeda is that they're going to forget about the endings and probably never return to them. This will be the setting of the Mass Effect games, period, for the foreseeable future.
By the looks of it, Bioware are totally capable of writing a new story in Andromeda that has nothing to do with Shepard or the ending choices, and if it's successful then we'll just carry on with new stories in a new galaxy. There's absolutely no requirement to address the endings. How will it "fester and rot" if everyone is talking about new characters, new races and the new plot of this game?
I also don't see how it'll matter in ten years, regardless. What game series is around for fifteen to twenty years in total? We'll be supremely lucky if there's another trilogy of games, and if Mass Effect is still profitable then they can just keep setting stuff in Andromeda - assuming the writers don't write themselves into a corner again.
tl;dr: Shepard's story is over and I don't think the writers will revisit the consequences of ME3's ending choices. It's all new stuff from here on out.
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.
Disregarding every player's choices in the franchise that was built around the idea of giving players choices that carried weight is better than leaving our choices intact? You guys don't even see how illogical and emotional you are.
I can sort of agree with it, in the sense that I am legitimately excited by this new premise and have been ever since we began theorizing about it many months ago, but at the same time it'd be good to go back eventually.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
I don't think that's really accurate - the entire point of going to Andromeda is that they're going to forget about the endings and probably never return to them. This will be the setting of the Mass Effect games, period, for the foreseeable future.
It's sad that this is what they have to do.. But there doesn't seem to be much choice.
I always felt like ME was trying to be an amped-up parallel to our real world space race, with it's nods to Shepard and Grissom and Armstrong and Gagarin... It's based in a reality where humanity honors and dreams about people like that. Humanity has gotten it's **** together finally, and can pull off some of those dreams, but now it's like US vs Russia all over again, except with Aliens. The stakes are higher: The galaxy itself. And it's got this very frontier/infancy feel to it. We're only JUST starting to grow. While the Reaper story is like someone coming in and shooting down those dreams for everyone, humans and alien alike (but we can win, of course).
I don't blame this game.. I blame the Reaper story. They're the ultimate cockblockers. We're just getting an entirely different story that is disconnected now. And the cynic in me says it's mostly about money and branding ("What does N7 mean to you?", for instance. They're obviously clueless themselves. It sounds like something a marketing grad would ask. Not a writer or developer).
I agree with you here, but I wish people would have settled down about the endings by now. But like them or no, they have to dealt with at some point, yes.
Bioware developed an awesome setting which stretched over three games and still had a lot of room for expansion. It sucks to abandon that forever just to avoid having to deal with some difficult brain storming and writing. Surely we can all agree on that.
It sounds to me like you're supporting my point. I want the endings to be settled. Done with. I don't want to deal with them hanging over the Milky Way for the next decade and causing all sorts of plot holes.
I can sort of agree with it, in the sense that I am legitimately excited by this new premise and have been ever since we began theorizing about it many months ago, but at the same time it'd be good to go back eventually.
Reboot (fiction)
In serial fiction, to reboot means to discard all continuity in an established series in order to recreate its characters, timeline and backstory from the beginning.
that's essentially what you're doing by changing the entire setting/leaving the known fictional universe behind.
Going to Andromeda is no more a reboot than going to Tevinter would be a reboot of the Dragon Age series.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Going to Andromeda is no more a reboot than going to Tevinter would be a reboot of the Dragon Age series.
I see this is as more like destroying Thedas and then going to another continent where nothing is known. And if there's an "ark", it'd be even more stupid. Like a boat with a remnant of humans/dwarves/elves and qunari.
Moving to Tevinter is no different the difference between Tuchanka and Palaven. These are stages for cultural factions. Not entirely different galaxies.
Going to Andromeda is no more a reboot than going to Tevinter would be a reboot of the Dragon Age series.
Except a story in Tevinter doesn't mean the player never sees Feralden ever again. It doesn't mean that no characters from Feralden ever show up again. It doesn't mean that events in Feralden never have any kind of influence on the story or protagonist.
that's essentially what you're doing by changing the entire setting/leaving the known fictional universe behind.
I see this is as more like destroying Thedas and then going to another continent where nothing is known. And if there's an "ark", it'd be even more stupid. Like a boat with a remnant of humans/dwarves/elves and qunari.
Moving to Tevinter is no different the difference between Tuchanka and Palaven. These are stages for cultural factions. Not entirely different galaxies.
Guest_StreetMagic_*
Except it's not. A change of setting is not a reboot. When Daredevil left Hell's Kitchen for San Francisco that wasn't a reboot. Leaving the Milky Way for Andromeda is just a change of setting. Nothing more.
But we've never been to or even seen the Imperium so it's exactly like going to the Andromeda. The Andromeda is there in the Mass Effect trilogy, just like the Tevinter Imperium has always been there in the Dragon Age games, we've just never been to those areas.
We know plenty about the Imperium already though. The whole lore and foundation of the series are built upon that. You can't have Andraste or Blood Magic or oppression of Elves or the Chantry or many other things without it. It's always there, lingering in the backdrop. We already see it in the comics, meet many characters and villains from there, and the whole world is still affected by their actions.
We know plenty about the Imperium already though. The whole lore and foundations of the series is built upon that. You can't have Andraste or Blood Magic or oppression of Elves or the Chantry or many other things without it. It's always there, lingering in the backdrop. It's very much a part of the setting.
We know stuff about the Andromeda galaxy. Ya know, because it's real. Nothing is being lost or rebooted in the Andromeda galaxy. It's a new setting. Would it make you feel better if we said it was like setting Dragon Age 4 in Par Vollen?
We don't know practically anything about Andromeda other than the most basic of information. And Bioware isn't using even that. The cluster, our entire setting, we will be in is a fictional one, nonexistent in reality.
No, it's not even like DA4 being in Par Vollen since we know about the environment/lore/culture/etc there. The only accurate comparison is a brand new continent Thedas knows nothing about.
I don't think that's really accurate - the entire point of going to Andromeda is that they're going to forget about the endings and probably never return to them. This will be the setting of the Mass Effect games, period, for the foreseeable future.
By the looks of it, Bioware are totally capable of writing a new story in Andromeda that has nothing to do with Shepard or the ending choices, and if it's successful then we'll just carry on with new stories in a new galaxy. There's absolutely no requirement to address the endings. How will it "fester and rot" if everyone is talking about new characters, new races and the new plot of this game?
I also don't see how it'll matter in ten years, regardless. What game series is around for fifteen to twenty years in total? We'll be supremely lucky if there's another trilogy of games, and if Mass Effect is still profitable then they can just keep setting stuff in Andromeda - assuming the writers don't write themselves into a corner again.
tl;dr: Shepard's story is over and I don't think the writers will revisit the consequences of ME3's ending choices. It's all new stuff from here on out.
I can't help but agree with both of you on this. I think there is something else we need to look at as well, Dragon Age is never set in the same place and on the one occasion an area is revisited (Redcliffe) it's done in a way that has 0 impact on the previous choices you made. It's not hard to see them doing the same thing here with new trilogies, each in it's own new galaxy, the difference being that (this all assumes the rumours are true btw) the previous galaxy in it's entirety will have 0 impact on your current game and vice versa.
First off, if the ME team decides to use an ark theory, why would it be so hard to believe? If the galaxy was coming to an end wouldn't it have made since that while Shepherd is out trying to stop the Reapers that someone else may have been creating a failsafe by sending ships with people from all planets in the Milky Way to a different system to try and prolong the existence of their races. I think the ark theory is a great idea and possible direction.
It is hard to believe because nowhere is it established by the ME team that our cycle can make an intergalactic trip while also having established problems that can't be overcome with what our cycle has yet. But all of a sudden we cracked that huge of a technological leap?
Me personally if it was after the Reaper War then sure why not, but not before or during.
Retour en haut