90 réponses à ce sujet

[fyz306903]

The catalyst only stated that synthetics would be destroyed. It never said they couldn't be rebuilt or the tools to build them would be destroyed. I really don't see it being that unreasonable to rebuild them at all, especially considering Admiral Hackett was talking about building everything else in the EC.

Yeah, I'd be fine with this being canon. But I'm also aware that we don't really know when the next ME game is even set, so I'll be interested in knowing how (if at all) it'll address the choices and endings of the original trilogy. I suppose that if it's set alongside the original ME trilogy (which I personally think will happen), then it won't need to adress the endings, but I hope it does in some way. 

[Beerfish]

I hope they don't even mention Shepard at all in the new games.

[Revan Reborn]

Yeah, I'd be fine with this being canon. But I'm also aware that we don't really know when the next ME game is even set, so I'll be interested in knowing how (if at all) it'll address the choices and endings of the original trilogy. I suppose that if it's set alongside the original ME trilogy (which I personally think will happen), then it won't need to adress the endings, but I hope it does in some way. 

I'm willing to bet that MENext will take place after the original trilogy just because that has always been BioWare's process when it comes to making new games in a franchise. They never go backward in time. Always forward, even if it's a new protagonist like we see in DA2 and DAI.

 

I also think it's necessary for BioWare to address the endings and bring closure on this once and for all. Regardless of how one feels about the choices at the ending of ME3, this is a part of the franchise now and I'd like to see the impact the choices have for the future.

 

I hope they don't even mention Shepard at all in the new games.

He will certainly at least be mentioned in the same capacity the DAO Warden will be in DAI. I have a feeling we'll likely hear about Shepard quite a bit just because of his accomplishments. It will also help to underscore the new threat our new protagonist must face and how everybody doesn't recognize the real danger. KotOR II had an approach such as this and was very successful in its storytelling. We also received quite a bit of background and history about Revan (even if it was embellished or inaccurate) that really did add to the wonder and mystery of KotOR II.

[caradoc2000]

Nobody has the technology or the knowledge to build a reaper.

Oh-kay...
 
After WW1 - world leaders said "never again", yet less than 20 years after that we got WW2.
After WW2 - world leaders said "never again", yet look at what we have today.
After *Destroy* - world leaders said "never again", ....

[Dar'Nara]

One constant thing about history is that nothing is ever learned from it.

Mm, good point

[Revan Reborn]

Oh-kay...
 
After WW1 - world leaders said "never again", yet less than 20 years after that we got WW2.
After WW2 - world leaders said "never again", yet look at what we have today.
After *Destroy* - world leaders said "never again", ....

What does war not happening again have to do with building a reaper? It's an ancient and advanced technology far beyond the technical prowess of any species in existence. You can't build something if you don't have the tools or the knowledge to make it to start. It's impossible. Failings of the Treaty Versailles and the stupidity behind starting the Cold War are completely irrelevant to this obvious fact.

[caradoc2000]

What does war not happening again have to do with building a reaper? It's an ancient and advanced technology far beyond the technical prowess of any species in existence. You can't build something if you don't have the tools or the knowledge to make it to start. It's impossible. Failings of the Treaty Versailles and the stupidity behind starting the Cold War are completely irrelevant to this obvious fact.

 

I agree - you almost had me there for a minute.

[Han Shot First]

If the game is a sequel, I'm hoping that any references to Shepard are handled in a similar manner to how we might refer to Julius Caesar or Napoleon. Shepard should be a historical figure rather than a semi-legendary or religious one. "The Shepherd' should not make it's way out of the Stargazer scene and into any future Mass Effect game.

[Shermos]

I'd like to see the main character be the grown up version of the kid we see at the end of ME3. That won't ruin character customisation since that kid could be male or female, and we see just his/her back in shadow.  

 

Shep shouldn't be referred to as "The Shepard", just "Shepard", and his deeds need not be referred to in detail. It need only be said that he saved the galaxy from the Reaper cycle and is a hero and inspiration to the main character. Perhaps references to major events in the trilogy could be made. But then things start to get complicated.

[Revan Reborn]

If the game is a sequel, I'm hoping that any references to Shepard are handled in a similar manner to how we might refer to Julius Caesar or Napoleon. Shepard should be a historical figure rather than a semi-legendary or religious one. "The Shepherd' should not make it's way out of the Stargazer scene and into any future Mass Effect game.

This would only be likely under the assumption that MENext takes place far into the future. It's possible, but I don't believe this game will be too far after the events of ME3. We are likely to see familiar faces, and depending on who it is depends on how much time can pass.

 

I'd like to see the main character be the grown up version of the kid we see at the end of ME3. That won't ruin character customisation since that kid could be male or female, and we see just his/her back in shadow.  

 

Shep shouldn't be referred to as "The Shepard", just "Shepard", and his deeds need not be referred to in detail. It need only be said that he saved the galaxy from the Reaper cycle and is a hero and inspiration to the main character. Perhaps references to major events in the trilogy could be made. But then things start to get complicated.

The kid with the grandfather? It was definitely a boy by the voice, but that is an interesting idea. I'm not sure it's the direction BioWare will go, but it would put that ending scene into context since it was a little strange.

 

I think the previous poster was making a religious reference to the Bible. I already believe all of our choices will be addressed in a Dragon Age Keep equivalent for Mass Effect. What we did in 1-3 will likely affect the world state in MENext and I would be surprised if we only hear a few mentions of Shepard. This will obviously be a new protagonist and journey, but Shepard is absolutely crucial to the ME experience. Whether he is still alive or long dead, there needs to be a continuity and a connection.

[wiyazzie]

I'm really interested on how they are going to explain the ending of ME3 if you decided you wanted to control the reapers or chose the synthesis option.

[fchopin]

Please explain op how the next game will continue with a Shepard legend without Bioware picking one of the endings in ME3?

[DarthSliver]

Please explain op how the next game will continue with a Shepard legend without Bioware picking one of the endings in ME3?

 

Shepard choosing Control or Synthesis is frankly out of character for Shepard. Since ME1 Shepard has set out to destroy the Reapers, the Reapers obviously saw Shepard as a threat since they killed him in ME2. Then in ME2 he/she was still bent on trying to destroy the Reapers. I also believe throughout all of ME3 Shepard wanted to destroy the Reapers, frankly it is out of character for Shepard not to choose the Destroy ending since that was Shepards goal since the start of the series.

 

This is also the foundation I believe people used for the Indoctrination Theory that was started after the world saw ME3s ending.  Shepard has been out to destroy the Reapers from the start of the series all the way before the Starkid was introduced.    

[Iakus]

As far as I'm concerned, neither Shepard nor the Reapers nor any other character from the trilogy should referenced to at all, The next Mass Effect game should be as clean a slate as Neverwinter Nights is to Baldur's Gate.  Same setting, wholly separate story.

[Revan Reborn]

I'm really interested on how they are going to explain the ending of ME3 if you decided you wanted to control the reapers or chose the synthesis option.

I am as well. I'm sure this was determined before they actually released ME3 as BioWare clearly had a long-term plan of where to take the franchise.

 

Please explain op how the next game will continue with a Shepard legend without Bioware picking one of the endings in ME3?

Dragon Age Keep for Mass Effect would be the obvious answer. If BioWare were to disregard giving the player at least three valid choices (I don't count refuse), the most obvious default ending would be Destroy as the poster below alluded to. Synthesis and Control do not make sense based on Shepard's actions and philosophy on the Reapers.

 

As far as I'm concerned, neither Shepard nor the Reapers nor any other character from the trilogy should referenced to at all, The next Mass Effect game should be as clean a slate as Neverwinter Nights is to Baldur's Gate.  Same setting, wholly separate story.

I think what is much more likely to happen is how BioWare has approached Dragon Age. I'd hardly consider methods they used more than a decade ago to be an accurate indicator of the BioWare today. BioWare has changed significantly since then in terms of leadership and overall.

[Ahriman]

If I'm not mistaking on N7 day Bioware said, that ME4 will be more of spiritual succesor, not sequel. So here go your edings.

I don't mind though, they are all broken anyway.

[Revan Reborn]

If I'm not mistaking on N7 day Bioware said, that ME4 will be more of spiritual succesor, not sequel. So here go your edings.

I don't mind though, they are all broken anyway.

You took what BioWare said out of context. What they were suggesting is that this isn't just ME3 with a new protagonist and some new game features. They are rebuilding the game from the ground up to be an entirely new, next-gen experience. That is what they mean by a spiritual successor. It has nothing to do with the story and the plot.

 

I will bet my 11 years of playing BioWare games that, based on their own traditions and recent precedent, our choices from the original trilogy will have an impact on MENext. Will Shepard be in the game? No. Of course not. Does that mean his choices will not have an impact on the world state? Absolutely not. On the contrary, I believe our choices will matter very much, as this is a BioWare game after all. When was the last game BioWare released that didn't allow your choices to influence the next one to a degree? They aren't going to break their own game philosophy.

[Shermos]

As far as I'm concerned, neither Shepard nor the Reapers nor any other character from the trilogy should referenced to at all, The next Mass Effect game should be as clean a slate as Neverwinter Nights is to Baldur's Gate.  Same setting, wholly separate story.

 

I don't think we will get a totally clean slate. Shepard and his deeds will likely be referenced, and there could be something like the Dragon Age Keep to change our initial world state (in a minor way). It will be a wholly separate story with new characters though, we can be sure of that. Maybe we'll get to meet some of the old characters (the longer lived ones like Wrex and Liara) as NPC's. 

 

I'm pretty sure you'll get most of what you want, but not a full reboot. ME3 is part of the canon for better or worse.  

[Drone223]

I don't think we will get a totally clean slate. Shepard and his deeds will likely be referenced, and there could be something like the Dragon Age Keep to change our initial world state (in a minor way). It will be a wholly separate story with new characters though, we can be sure of that. Maybe we'll get to meet some of the old characters (the longer lived ones like Wrex and Liara) as NPC's. 

 

I'm pretty sure you'll get most of what you want, but not a full reboot. ME3 is part of the canon for better or worse.  

^1000x this.

[goishen]

Well, if it is in Shep's lifetime, I'm just hoping that they bring back the psychotic biotic.   God, I loved her.
 

[Umbar]

Shepard choosing Control or Synthesis is frankly out of character for Shepard. Since ME1 Shepard has set out to destroy the Reapers, the Reapers obviously saw Shepard as a threat since they killed him in ME2. Then in ME2 he/she was still bent on trying to destroy the Reapers. I also believe throughout all of ME3 Shepard wanted to destroy the Reapers, frankly it is out of character for Shepard not to choose the Destroy ending since that was Shepards goal since the start of the series.

 

This is also the foundation I believe people used for the Indoctrination Theory that was started after the world saw ME3s ending.  Shepard has been out to destroy the Reapers from the start of the series all the way before the Starkid was introduced.    

 

Mass Effect is a roleplaying game.For your Shepard Destroy may have been the only in-character decision. It wasn't for mine. My Shepard didn't care about destroying the Reapers; he cared about saving the galaxy. 

 

As for MENext, ideally, I would like to see some reflection of the events of the trilogy if it is going to be a sequel or side-quel. Given how massively game-changing every single one of the endings is, I don't see how they can not refer to them if it is a sequel. 

 

If it's a prequel, then maybe some Easter Eggs.

[Revan Reborn]

Well, if it is in Shep's lifetime, I'm just hoping that they bring back the psychotic biotic.   God, I loved her.
 

Jack? I'm skeptical of the game taking place when Shepard is active. That was mere speculation a gaming journalist made up taking BioWare's words out of context. I believe it's possible we may see Wrex or Liara, but I'm expecting MENext to take place far enough in the future where Shepard and others with shorter lifespans won't be in the picture. It would tie up more loose ends that way.

 

Mass Effect is a roleplaying game.For your Shepard Destroy may have been the only in-character decision. It wasn't for mine. My Shepard didn't care about destroying the Reapers; he cared about saving the galaxy. 

 

As for MENext, ideally, I would like to see some reflection of the events of the trilogy if it is going to be a sequel or side-quel. Given how massively game-changing every single one of the endings is, I don't see how they can not refer to them if it is a sequel. 

 

If it's a prequel, then maybe some Easter Eggs.

To be quite honest with you, Mass Effect is a terrible role playing game, compared to other BioWare titles. The reason I say this is because you are either a renegade Shepard, or a paragon Shepard. Choice is illusory as you can only follow the good guy path or the bad ass path. They both have their own methods of dealing with a situation, but they ultimately want the same goal, which was established since ME1: Destroy the Reapers. Also, it's worth pointing out that the only way to truly "save the galaxy" is to destroy the Reapers. Control, Synthesis, and Refuse only create loopholes and the possibility of the Reaper's return. Destroy is the only definitive choice.

 

MENext will definitely take place after the original trilogy. BioWare has never done a prequel, and certainly it wouldn't make any sense either as we would not be able to import our choices, which has been a standard for BioWare since ME1.

[von uber]

I hope there is a 1km high statue of femshep lit by search lights, with a smaller tableaux of the other squad mates around the base.


Nothing grand.

[Umbar]

To be quite honest with you, Mass Effect is a terrible role playing game, compared to other BioWare titles. The reason I say this is because you are either a renegade Shepard, or a paragon Shepard. Choice is illusory as you can only follow the good guy path or the bad ass path. They both have their own methods of dealing with a situation, but they ultimately want the same goal, which was established since ME1: Destroy the Reapers. Also, it's worth pointing out that the only way to truly "save the galaxy" is to destroy the Reapers. Control, Synthesis, and Refuse only create loopholes and the possibility of the Reaper's return. Destroy is the only definitive choice.

 

MENext will definitely take place after the original trilogy. BioWare has never done a prequel, and certainly it wouldn't make any sense either as we would not be able to import our choices, which has been a standard for BioWare since ME1.

 

So you're saying Mass Effect is a terrible RPG because it constrains options and then you yourself are telling me that Shepard can only ever have one goal and can only really make one choice? How does that make any sense? 

 

I disagree that Destroy is the only reasonable option. The point is not whether you agree with that. I'm trying to tell you that I don't think Destroy is the only definitive choice and since that ME is a RPG, my viewpoint is just as valid as yours when it comes to picking an option. Destroy should not be any more canonical than Control/Synthesis etc. just because (according to you and others) it makes the most 'sense'. 

[Anacronian Stryx]

I would be perfectly happy if i didn't hear the name Shepard or saw a N7 logo at all in the next Mass Effect.