483 réponses à ce sujet

[Nitrocuban]

Talking down the meaning of all the choices won't help much with calming down the masses.

[Iakus]

You're advocating a complete reboot, yes? Inquisition is not a reboot. It's a continuation that acknowledges the canon.
 

Dragon Age has not (yet) done anything that rewrites Thedas at a fundamental level.  I have not (yet) had a character who has a chocie to 1) exterminate all mages 2) become a super-pride demon and rule Thedas forever with my army of demons or 3) force all of Thedas to submit to the Qun.

 

or 4) Give a speech and watch the world burn.

 

Should that ever happen, however, Yeah I would advocate rebooting Dragon Age as well.  As it is, each game takes place in a different nation from where the previous one took place.  But down that path in Mass Effect lies Ark Theory.

 

 

 

Or don't, yeah. There's feedback, and then there's something else.

 

There's no statute of limitations on criticism.  Praise doesn't have a higher shelf life.  Sorry.

 

 

Actually, yeah, they have. Folks who talked a big game about being driven away have returned, and that'll continue more and more as the shiny approaches.

Funny, a lot of people who used to be even more vocal in their disappointment of ME3 than I have left and not returned.  I know people who didn't buy DAI specifically because of disappointment in ME3. 

 

"Shiny" is not a cure-all.  And people do remember, even if they don't always speak up.

[Han Shot First]

Destroy lends itself very well to a sequel. Control and Synthesis...not so much. You need to get the Reapers out of the way first to make for new villains.

 

I think that was one of the major mistakes Bioware made with the endings in retrospect. The only solution to the Reapers should have been their destruction, much like how in Dragon Age: Origins your only solution to the Blight is killing the archdemon. That isn't to say that game should have eliminated player choice or multiple endings, just they would have been better off having the choices and varying results be smaller scale. (again, like DA:O)

 

On that note I would not mind seeing a Destroy sequel, and would probably be fairly excited about it. It is also the fan favorite ending, so its also the least likely of the three to cause the forums to go into nuclear meltdown if its the sole ending choice carried over into the next game. Having said that, I chose Destroy so my preference is admittedly a little selfish. And I know that not everyone chose Destroy, so a Destroy sequel is far from being a perfect solution. But I do think it is Bioware's best option if a sequel is ever attempted.

 

The Ark Ship route has some potential to be interesting though. 

[Mcfly616]

Destroy lends itself very well to a sequel. Control and Synthesis...not so much. You need to get the Reapers out of the way first to make for new villains.

 

Not necessarily. As long as the villains aren't galaxy-eating juggernauts (which they shouldn't be), the Reapers have no need to get involved. 

 

 

 

 

I imagine they wouldn't interest themselves in the lowly affairs of individual beings and their struggles. 

[Han Shot First]

Not necessarily. As long as the villains aren't galaxy-eating juggernauts (which they shouldn't be), the Reapers have no need to get involved. 

 

 

 

 

I imagine they wouldn't interest themselves in the lowly affairs of individual beings and their struggles. 

 

Sure, but Bioware has never done an RPG where the big bad was only someone the protagonist had a grudge against. They've all also been threats to the region, kingdoms/nations, world, or galaxy the protagonist is operating in. I think its unlikely we'll be getting a story where the antagonist is the Jabba the Hutt to our Han Solo.

[Vazgen]

We know that 1) ME: Next will be massive and 2) there will be a big focus on exploration. They said that Mako will return and our character will not start from being notorious like Shepard but that he/she'll be skilled at the start. We also saw those shirts with Pathfinder Initiative label.

Based on all this I don't really see a Han Solo-type protagonist (a pity). My guess is that A.R.K.C.O.N. is some large private corporation which forms Pathfinder Initiative for activating dormant mass relays and has a contract with Alliance to use N7 recruits for that initiative. So, basically, like Shepard before Elysium/Akuze/Torfan.

[Mcfly616]

Sure, but Bioware has never done an RPG where the big bad was only someone the protagonist had a grudge against. They've all also been threats to the region, kingdoms/nations, world, or galaxy the protagonist is operating in. I think its unlikely we'll be getting a story where the antagonist is the Jabba the Hutt to our Han Solo.

Yeah, they've never done it. All they've ever done is what you've described. Which is exactly why this time around they should go with a more personal (small-scale) narrative spanning across this vast universe. 

 

 

Many are sick of playing the savior of the world/galaxy in every single game. Bioware needs to expand their horizons and stop falling back on the same formula time and time again.

[armoredwolf26]

I think they're going to keep the endings and continue forward.

[Mcfly616]

I think they're going to keep the endings and continue forward.

And if they go that route, they'll either have to canonize one of the endings or allow them to be imported. 

[Element Zero]

The endings need not be a major focus of the game. An NPC mentions whichever world state you choose to import via "The Keep", you grumble about how unimportant they've rendered your choice, and things move on into the rest of the (hopefully brilliant) game. This is their only real option, I think, with three wildly divergent endings.

EDIT: I finally had to google this "Ark Theory". No offense intended to those that may like it, but it's not my cup of tea. There are so many cleaner, more interesting paths to take, in my opinion. We've barely dusted the surface of the Milky Way. There is plenty of galaxy left to explore before we start jumping galaxies or sharks.

[Mcfly616]

The endings need not be a major focus of the game. An NPC mentions whichever world state you choose to import via "The Keep", you grumble about how unimportant they've rendered your choice, and things move on into the rest of the (hopefully brilliant) game. This is their only real option, I think, with three wildly divergent endings.
 

 That's essentially been my proposal everytime the topic of ending importation is brought up. The import can simply determine the setting. Merely an aesthetic for the game world. The story doesn't even need to discuss it whatsoever. It simply is all the characters have ever known. After all, we don't live out our entire lives with every journey we take revolving around the question "why is the sky blue?"

 

Destroy: no synthetics

Control: there's Reapers floating around Mass Relays and the Citadel as Galactic guardians

Synthesis: everybody has neon organic circuitry.

 

 

 

 

I concur on Ark Theory. Lame sauce...

[Nitrocuban]

I think with EC BW made it very clear that the 3 endings are very different from each other and lead to 3 totally genuine galaxies in the end.

We all don't know what BW's big plan for the future of the franchise was when they made the endings and EC, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't trivializing tME3's endings in ME4 and open up old wounds with it again.

[Mcfly616]

I think with EC BW made it very clear that the 3 endings are very different from each other and lead to 3 totally genuine galaxies in the end.

We all don't know what BW's big plan for the future of the franchise was when they made the endings and EC, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't trivializing tME3's endings in ME4 and open up old wounds with it again.

Yes, they are very different. Anybody who doesn't recognize that wasn't paying attention. However, unless they canonize one of the endings or allow for them to be imported as the determining factor of the next games world state, then there's absolutely no point whatsoever in making the game take place after the events of ME3.

 

 

Might as well make it in the current timeline before the Reaper War ever takes place if all they're gonna do with a sequel is blend all the endings into one or not even acknowledge them at all. Nothing would be more trivial than those approaches.

[Vazgen]

Yes, they are very different. Anybody who doesn't recognize that wasn't paying attention. However, unless they canonize one of the endings or allow for them to be imported as the determining factor of the next games world state, then there's absolutely no point whatsoever in making the game take place after the events of ME3.

 

 

Might as well make it in the current timeline before the Reaper War ever takes place if all they're gonna do with a sequel is blend all the endings into one or not even acknowledge them at all. Nothing would be more trivial than those approaches.

I don't see how prequel can work with focus on exploration. The new systems and new races we discover - where are they during the Reaper War? 

[Mcfly616]

I don't see how prequel can work with focus on exploration. The new systems and new races we discover - where are they during the Reaper War? 

99% of the galaxy is unexplored by Citadel species prior to the Reaper War. Exploration will work just fine.

 

Where are the new races? In their unexplored space, obviously. Maybe they're purposely not spacefaring. Maybe they're dormant until stumbled upon. Maybe the next protagonist and their team eradicate them before knowledge of them ever spreads to the civilizations of the galaxy. Plenty of possibilities....

[T-Raks]

99% of the galaxy is unexplored by Citadel species prior to the Reaper War. Exploration will work just fine.

 

Where are the new races? In their unexplored space, obviously. Maybe they're purposely not spacefaring. Maybe they're dormant until stumbled upon. Maybe the next protagonist and their team eradicate them before knowledge of them ever spreads to the civilizations of the galaxy. Plenty of possibilities....

I guess the point Vazgen makes is: how can we discover new races before the end of the Reaper War? Doesn't make much sense.

[Vazgen]

^This

 

If you discover new species, they have to be referenced at least. Even pyjaks and Yahg were referenced. You can't just introduce new species with advanced technology (based on concept art) and not reference them at all in a war that threatens to destroy all advanced organic life in the galaxy.

[Mcfly616]

I guess the point Vazgen makes is: how can we discover new races before the end of the Reaper War? Doesn't make much sense.

My previous post already addresses this in multiple ways....

[Mcfly616]

 

^This

 

If you discover new species, they have to be referenced at least. Even pyjaks and Yahg were referenced. You can't just introduce new species with advanced technology (based on concept art) and not reference them at all in a war that threatens to destroy all advanced organic life in the galaxy.

 

Who said anybody other than the protagonist and crew of the next game ever comes into contact with the new races?

 

 

 

 

You absolutely can introduce them and have no mention of them during the Reaper War if nobody in the entire galaxy knows about them except for the handful of people that discovered them.

[Vazgen]

Who said anybody other than the protagonist and crew of the next game ever comes into contact with the new races?

 

 

 

 

You absolutely can introduce them and have no mention of them during the Reaper War if nobody in the entire galaxy knows about them except for the handful of people that discovered them.

Lore. Unless you want them to change it.

 

Activating dormant mass relays is against Citadel regulations. You can't really do it without Council knowing. If you discover a new system the Council will know about it. And discovery of a new species is not something you will be able to keep secret

[Mcfly616]

Lore. Unless you want them to change it.

 

Activating dormant mass relays is against Citadel regulations. You can't really do it without Council knowing. If you discover a new system the Council will know about it. And discovery of a new species is not something you will be able to keep secret

 Nowhere in the lore does it suggest the Council knows about every species ever stumbled upon by an expedition team. And since when does every last being follow Citadel regs to begin with? I never said anything about a dormant relay. I also never suggested we could be on Council business. It certainly can be kept secret for the exact reasons I've already stated. Shepard himself doesn't even report back the fine details of his missions to the Council if he doesn't want to.

 

 

All I'm doing is listing legit ways it could work. All you're doing is saying it can't based on your own assumptions about how things will be.

[Vespervin]

The endings wouldn't matter if we're in another galaxy and our ship/fleet left before the end of ME3. I remember people were discussing this on these forums in the past. Only issue with that is, well, how long can BW go on with making new ME games and ignoring the ending of ME3?

 

Unless the game that makes a connection with the Milky Way is so far in the future that picking which ending you did choose in ME3 doesn't change the game that much. Destroy? Reapers were destroyed and synthetics were rebuilt... eventually. Control? Reapers are no longer around due to some event that wasn't covered in the games? Synthesis? Different colours and few dialogue differences? I don't know, just throwing random stuff out there.

[Mcfly616]

The endings wouldn't matter if we're in another galaxy and our ship/fleet left before the end of ME3. 

 If we leave the Milky Way, it won't be Mass Effect. Can't be Mass Effect without Mass Relays....

[Vazgen]

 

 Nowhere in the lore does it suggest the Council knows about every species ever stumbled upon by an expedition team. I never said anything about a dormant relay. I also never suggested we could be on Council business. It certainly can be kept secret for the exact reasons I've already stated. Shepard himself doesn't even report back the fine details of his missions to the Council if he doesn't want to.

 

 

All I'm doing is listing legit ways it could work. All you're doing is saying it can't based on your own assumptions about how things will be.

I'm trying to understand how you suggest introducing new species and systems to the galaxy without Council knowing. Lore clearly says that after the Rachni Wars Council regulations prohibit activating dormant mass relays leading to uncharted systems. Of course, you can create some other way to travel the galaxy without mass relays (something like this) and use it for a sequel but it will require introduction of a whole new major element in the existing lore. You can't introduce such a major element in a prequel or a spin-off because it will require rewriting existing lore, not expanding upon it. For any prequel or spin-off you will be limited to the existing systems due to the reasons mentioned above. Unless you think the Council is royally stupid and will not notice some ship activating dormant mass relays and discovering new technologically advanced species. 

 

I'm not basing anything on my assumptions. I've posted them in another thread. I'm basing my posts on existing lore and logical extrapolations from it. I don't see a legit way for it to work, all you suggested was "the Council doesn't have to know" which makes their competence highly doubtful. What's the point of creating regulations against activating dormant mass relays if you can't figure out that someone out there is activating them.

[Mcfly616]

 

 

I'm trying to understand how you suggest introducing new species and systems to the galaxy without Council knowing. Lore clearly says that after the Rachni Wars Council regulations prohibit activating dormant mass relays leading to uncharted systems. Of course, you can create some other way to travel the galaxy without mass relays (something like this) and use it for a sequel but it will require introduction of a whole new major element in the existing lore. You can't introduce such a major element in a prequel or a spin-off because it will require rewriting existing lore, not expanding upon it. For any prequel or spin-off you will be limited to the existing systems due to the reasons mentioned above. Unless you think the Council is royally stupid and will not notice some ship activating dormant mass relays and discovering new technologically advanced species. 

 

I'm not basing anything on my assumptions. I've posted them in another thread. I'm basing my posts on existing lore and logical extrapolations from it. I don't see a legit way for it to work, all you suggested was "the Council doesn't have to know" which makes their competence highly doubtful. What's the point of creating regulations against activating dormant mass relays if you can't figure out that someone out there is activating them.

 

You've just demonstrated that you didn't read (or understand) a single word of my post you quoted. I never suggested the activation of a dormant relay. Nothing I've suggested requires the rewriting of any of the existing lore. You actually are clearly assuming that the Council knows all there is to know whenever anything becomes known to anybody. That's neither logical, nor an extrapolation.

 

 

And their compentence has been highly doubtful since ME1. That is established lore.