1680 réponses à ce sujet

[JeffZero]

You know what was really weird? It was weird when The Illusive Man threw money at Shepard's corpse until Miranda tossed a lucky Phoenix Down on it and he got back up and breathed. That was really weird.

 

Sorry for the snark. It just kind of baffles me that we're so fixated on this element when Mass Effect writers have illustrated a relentless "well, we're going to make this work now because now we need this to happen" approach to storytelling for at least five years. Arguably for all seven.

 

There are legitimate-as-hell concerns to be expressed about this whole arrangement -- even if I personally disagree with said concerns for the most part -- but questioning the integrity of the lore really, truly strikes me as borderline naïve. This isn't Isaac Asimov's Foundation. This is Mass Effect, and Mass Effect does what it feels like when it feels like doing it.

[Jewellzify]

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?
If it was after the Reaper War, sure, but not before or during.

Well after the Reaper War, the Milky Way is devastated. And depending on your choices as Shepherd, either synthetics are destroyed, controlled, synthesis occurs, or the harvest is completed. So the time frame for the "Ark" theory would be during the Reaper War or the beginnings of the invasion. After the war, the technology would be too devastated to even attempt a galactic journey. I don't know how true this is but I remember hearing somewhere that there was an N7 team responsible for scouting new systems, I may have heard this as a rumor, in one of the games or in the comics but I can't be certain, but who's to say that an N7 scouting team found a way to the Andromeda through scouting? Again, keep in mind this is a fantasy, most of the facts will be learned along the way, no one but the writers and devs have all the answers. And you don't need all the facts in a fantasy world, did you have all the facts the first time you played Dragon Age? No, you learned as you went along...

[Vazgen]

You know what was really weird? It was weird when The Illusive Man threw money at Shepard's corpse until Miranda tossed a lucky Phoenix Down on it and he got back up and breathed. That was really weird.

 

Sorry for the snark. It just kind of baffles me that we're so fixated on this element when Mass Effect writers have illustrated a relentless "well, we're going to make this work now because now we need this to happen" approach to storytelling for at least five years. Arguably for all seven.

 

There are legitimate-as-hell concerns to be expressed about this whole arrangement -- even if I personally disagree with said concerns for the most part -- but questioning the integrity of the lore really, truly strikes me as borderline naïve. This isn't Isaac Asimov's Foundation. This is Mass Effect, and Mass Effect does what it feels like when it feels like doing it.

It's just people would prefer not to start a new Mass Effect game with a leap of faith like Lazarus project. Surely, they can do that like they did before but it won't be the best way to start a new game IMO. 

[Shermos]

You know what was really weird? It was weird when The Illusive Man threw money at Shepard's corpse until Miranda tossed a lucky Phoenix Down on it and he got back up and breathed. That was really weird.

 

Sorry for the snark. It just kind of baffles me that we're so fixated on this element when Mass Effect writers have illustrated a relentless "well, we're going to make this work now because now we need this to happen" approach to storytelling for at least five years. Arguably for all seven.

 

There are legitimate-as-hell concerns to be expressed about this whole arrangement -- even if I personally disagree with said concerns for the most part -- but questioning the integrity of the lore really, truly strikes me as borderline naïve. This isn't Isaac Asimov's Foundation. This is Mass Effect, and Mass Effect does what it feels like when it feels like doing it.

 

Fair enough, but this argument can be turned towards the people fixated on choices needing to 'matter' (have widely diverging consequences) as well. Outside of the first game, Mass Effect never really gave a damn about player choice. You killed the Rachni queen? Oh well, the Reapers made a clone. Miranda died in the suicide mission? We still have her sister don't we? You let the council die? Nothing really changes even though Humanity is supposed to have the controlling say in the new council. Nevermind what happened to Anderson.

 

No matter what we do, the outcomes are broadly the same. So why not write the consequences to the endings to be broadly similar after x amount of time?   

[JeffZero]

I'd be totally cool with that route, too, Shermos. Honestly though? I think had they chosen that path there'd be just as many people miffed that it invalidates things wholesale. From what I gather EP is a good example; he's always seemed against the route of "combining the endings into one garbled vision" quite a bit, and I know he isn't alone. It seems to me any path they picked was bound to elicit disappointment from a group. I know what mine would be! A prequel. I'd feel pangs of disappointment if it were a prequel, not gonna lie.

[Vazgen]

I'd be totally cool with that route, too, Shermos. Honestly though? I think had they chosen that path there'd be just as many people miffed that it invalidates things wholesale. From what I gather EP is a good example; he's always seemed against the route of "combining the endings into one garbled vision" quite a bit, and I know he isn't alone. It seems to me any path they picked was bound to elicit disappointment from a group. I know what mine would be! A prequel. I'd feel pangs of disappointment if it were a prequel, not gonna lie.

I agree. I'm only weary about the execution they choose. They can write a travel to another galaxy without messing with existing lore, it's all up to the writers. I'm not opposed to the idea of having the game set in a new galaxy, I'm opposed to getting there via space magic like the Lazarus project. 

[Shermos]

I'd be totally cool with that route, too, Shermos. Honestly though? I think had they chosen that path there'd be just as many people miffed that it invalidates things wholesale. From what I gather EP is a good example; he's always seemed against the route of "combining the endings into one garbled vision" quite a bit, and I know he isn't alone. It seems to me any path they picked was bound to elicit disappointment from a group. I know what mine would be! A prequel. I'd feel pangs of disappointment if it were a prequel, not gonna lie.

 

So would I. I have some hope that this rumour is just a troll someone made up and that the "clever plan" one of the devs mentioned last year is a third way which deals with the endings decently, but without needing to force the player to a new galaxy, never to return. I only ask for a solution which isn't a cop out, and still lets us return to the setting we know and love. That would be worth a four year+ wait. 

[JeffZero]

I really, truly don't think this is a troll. Not just because BioWare leaks have historically basically never been trolls but because multiple people on NeoGAF who we know heard things ages ago confirmed that it sounds about right. There's nothing I can do to convince those on BSN who don't buy into that sort of thing that it's just about as good as BioWare themselves coming out and acknowledging it, which is fine, I get that! Time will tell, but personally, yeah, I'll be really, really surprised (and a touch confused too) if it turns out to be a fake.

[Shermos]

Well even in that case, the leak (at least what I read of it) doesn't explicitly say we can never return to the Milky Way at any point in this game or the one after. Nothing was said about how we get there, or if we can get back. Ark theory proponents have filled in a lot of blanks.

[JeffZero]

Yeah, certainly true.

[Sion1138]

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?

 

The accurate comparison would be, if Dragon Age 4 took place on another planet.

[Gwydden]

So would I. I have some hope that this rumour is just a troll someone made up and that the "clever plan" one of the devs mentioned last year is a third way which deals with the endings decently, but without needing to force the player to a new galaxy, never to return. I only ask for a solution which isn't a cop out, and still lets us return to the setting we know and love. That would be worth a four year+ wait. 

I fail to see how this is more of a cop out than anything else.

 

Choosing a canon ending? Cop out.

 

Mixing the endings? Cop out.

 

Going to a different galaxy? Different kind of cop out, but hardly a particularly worse offender.

 

The accurate comparison would be, if Dragon Age 4 took place on another planet.

*continent

 

The setting of DA, Thedas, is a continent, not a planet. And I wouldn't have any problems with having the next game be about exploring a different land. It wouldn't be ideal, since there's still stuff to see in the parts of the setting we know, but it wouldn't be a big deal and frankly, Thedas hasn't been messed up the way the Milky Way has.

[Sion1138]

*continent

 

The setting of DA, Thedas, is a continent, not a planet. And I wouldn't have any problems with having the next game be about exploring a different land. It wouldn't be ideal, since there's still stuff to see in the parts of the setting we know, but it wouldn't be a big deal and frankly, Thedas hasn't been messed up the way the Milky Way has.

 

I know, come on...

 

What I meant is that a galaxy switch in Mass Effect is in some sense just as preposterous as a planet switch would be in Dragon Age.

 

It doesn't take centuries to travel between continents.

[Heimdall]

Well even in that case, the leak (at least what I read of it) doesn't explicitly say we can never return to the Milky Way at any point in this game or the one after. Nothing was said about how we get there, or if we can get back. Ark theory proponents have filled in a lot of blanks.

While I agree that nothing was said, I think we can conclude that returning is unlikely, thinking logically. I mean, most people I've seen agree that the primary reason for moving to a new galaxy would be to avoid the endings whether they support Ark Theory or not. That doesn't really work if returning is an option. Otherwise, why make such a leap? They could just as well use an unexplored portion of the Milky Way.

[Heimdall]

I know, come on...

What I meant is that a galaxy switch is in some sense just as preposterous a planet switch would be in Dragon Age.

It doesn't take centuries to travel between continents.

But it does take a long time, months to years even, especially if you don't rightly know where you're going. Longer than would make regular travel feasible within the confines of the game, especially if the passengers intended to settle, not just take a tour. Both would involve interacting with alien cultures removed from what we know but operating under the same universe's rules, just with a new perspective.

[Shermos]

While I agree that nothing was said, I think we can conclude that returning is unlikely, thinking logically. I mean, most people I've seen agree that the primary reason for moving to a new galaxy would be to avoid the endings whether they support Ark Theory or not. That doesn't really work if returning is an option. Otherwise, why make such a leap? They could just as well use an unexplored portion of the Milky Way.

The intention could easily be to help calm ending haters, with the plan of returning to the MW later once people have seen Bioware can still do Mass Effect well. Or it could simply be to expand the the Mass Effect Universe further. The question of what happened to a galaxy without Reapers coming every 50,000 years is an interesting one to explore, but it needn't necessitate leaving behind everything we know and love from before.

[Heimdall]

The intention could easily be to help calm ending haters, with the plan of returning to the MW later once people have seen Bioware can still do Mass Effect well. Or it could simply be to expand the the Mass Effect Universe further. The question of what happened to a galaxy without Reapers coming every 50,000 years is an interesting one to explore, but it needn't necessitate leaving behind everything we know and love from before.

Expanding the universe could be done by exploring much closer to home than leaping to a new galaxy, without straining (but not breaking imo) the plausibility limits of the lore. I don't buy that as an important reason. As for going back to the Milky Way in general: For a future game, maybe (I doubt it), but certainly not this one.

[Shermos]

I fail to see how this is more of a cop out than anything else.
 
Choosing a canon ending? Cop out.
 
Mixing the endings? Cop out.
 
Going to a different galaxy? Different kind of cop out, but hardly a particularly worse offender.

You're assuming those are the only three options available for dealing with the ending. They aren't to a team of writers brainstorming together. And to me, going to a different galaxy never to return is worse, because at least with the others, we don't have to leave the MW behind.

[ElitePinecone]

The intention could easily be to help calm ending haters, with the plan of returning to the MW later once people have seen Bioware can still do Mass Effect well. 

 

Doubtful, I think... unless the reaction to Andromeda is overwhelmingly negative, which I don't think it will be.

 

ME3 (and especially the EC and Citadel) were the definitive end to Shepard's story, and might very well have been the definitive end to the Milky Way as we'll experience it in these games. I genuinely believe BW tried to telegraph that as much as they could (without spoiling future plans) in the interviews and videos they were doing back in 2013, and unfortunately I don't think a lot of fans really got the message. All along they've been saying it's time to move on and move forward, that Shepard's story is done, and I wouldn't be surprised if we never return to those locations during a game. 

 

If ME: N really is in Andromeda then they've deliberately moved the setting to give themselves as much freedom going forward as possible, and I can't really see them abandoning that plan. If this is the start of a new trilogy (which means, like, the next 7 or 8 years of games?) then I don't think the MW will be a focus during that time - and even afterwards, it might only return as part of a prequel. 

[goishen]

I'd be totally cool with that route, too, Shermos. Honestly though? I think had they chosen that path there'd be just as many people miffed that it invalidates things wholesale. From what I gather EP is a good example; he's always seemed against the route of "combining the endings into one garbled vision" quite a bit, and I know he isn't alone. It seems to me any path they picked was bound to elicit disappointment from a group. I know what mine would be! A prequel. I'd feel pangs of disappointment if it were a prequel, not gonna lie.

 

 

Ehhh.   ME is a game, below or above all of those other layers about feeling.  Below the "choose your own adventure" books it's all about the feelings that you have when you first played the game.  For example, the first time I ever played ME2, half of my crew died.  The first time I ever played ME3, I let Tali die.  If the story can make me feel something for the characters involved?  Whoah buddy.  I'm there.  I'm fully emotionally involved.  Feelings are more addictive than crack.

 

Those were powerful moments for me.  Sure, I could've reloaded and done a couple'a things differently and got a different outcome. But I didn't.  Because I wanted to see the story through to the end.  To see how this Shepard would turn out.  I don't want to forget about Miranda.  I don't want to forget about anybody that my life has been touched by through these stories.

 

And I think that BioWare kind'a knows that.

[Torgette]

I don't mind the "leap of faith" to get us to Andromeda, I just hope we get to experience that leap of faith and we're not starting the game already in Andromeda.

[Steppenwolf]

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.

Nothing is established in the games until it's established in the games. It was never established that people could come back from the dead until they made it happen in ME2. It was never established that there could be a hologram of a dead kid controlling the Reapers from inside the Citadel until they made it happen in ME3. They can do whatever they want. They could set ME4 in Thedas if they wanted to.

[Gwydden]

I know, come on...

 

What I meant is that a galaxy switch in Mass Effect is in some sense just as preposterous as a planet switch would be in Dragon Age.

 

It doesn't take centuries to travel between continents.

Beg to differ.

 

Also, if the DA team wanted to add interplanetary/interdimensional travel, there's nothing stopping them from making it last mere seconds. In fact, such a thing is a staple of portal fantasy and, for what I can see, it has recently become rad in several epic fantasy video game franchises (Warcraft, Warlock, Heroes of Might and Magic, Age of Wonders).

 

This is just one of those occasions were the plot requires a certain technology to be available, and is hardly much more unrealistic(ly convenient) than eezo or the Lazarus Project. Bonus points if the crew of the hypothetical 'Ark' remain in stasis and only arrive centuries or even millennia after their departure. That's pretty much all you need: to keep people alive for a really, really long time, which we know it's possible thanks to Javik.

 

You're assuming those are the only three options available for dealing with the ending.

They're not. But I've still to hear anyone come up with a better solution than either choosing a canon ending or going to a different galaxy.

 

They aren't to a team of writers brainstorming together.

You don't think people here have brainstormed together to death? The NME writing team could theoretically come up with something better, of course. If so, I'm all ears.

 

And to me, going to a different galaxy never to return is worse, because at least with the others, we don't have to leave the MW behind.

I'm not particularly attached to the Milky Way. Staying or leaving sound about as good to me, although the latter one is slowly winning out. So I admit there's a difference in perspective here.

[Gwydden]

A few fun facts. There are indeed dozens (36, apparently) of dwarf galaxies that are closer to the Milky Way than Andromeda. Of those, 15 orbit Andromeda, 20 orbit the Milky Way and 1 orbits the Triangulum Galaxy (second closest major galaxy to the Milky Way). The smallest of these 'dwarf galaxies' seems to be about a fourth of the size of the Milky Way — so it's still pretty damn huge. The nearest dwarf galaxy is 25,000 light years away and it's about 3/4 of the size of the Milky Way. By comparison, Andromeda is slightly larger than the Milky Way but stands 2.5 million light years away.

 

Now, do notice I'm not an expert and all this comes from a very cursory Internet search, so don't take my word for it. But I would agree that, in practical terms, it would probably be better to send the 'Ark' to one of the dwarf galaxies close by, even if it's just temporarily. It would serve its function just as well, within the story as well as without. However, I can see why they went with Andromeda. Beyond the name recognition, going in a one way expedition to settle and explore Canis Major Dwarf doesn't sound quite as glamorous as doing the same for Andromeda, nearest major galaxy and largest in the local cluster.

 

Once again, form wins over function. Whether you're okay with that or not, well, that's rather subjective.

 

EDIT: Revision

 

Now, let's go with the fastest ship available to us, namely Reapers, with an astounding 30 light years per day. At this speed, it would take about 230 years to get to Andromeda, assuming no stops and a direct trajectory. Under those same conditions, it would take less than 3 years to get to Canis Major Dwarf. Which... isn't good. If our hypothetical Ark wanted to escape the Reapers for good, Canis does not seem like a very good option. Admittedly, there are others, but two or three centuries to Andromeda actually sounds pretty reasonable.

[Shermos]

I think we've gone about as far as we can with discussing the setting until we get another big leak or some official info.

One thing which strikes me about the leak is that it feels very rinse and repeatish, right down to the threat of extinction. The person who thinks this is effectively a reboot is right in more ways than one. I'd be wary of this no matter where the game was set. And let's hope some of the things which sound suspiciously like DAI style quests and grinding don't make it through or get improved.