483 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Really don't like this "Ark Theory" or blank slate stuff. I just want to carry on with what we've got! I'm all for exploring the Galaxy (and perhaps beyond) but I'm sure Bioware have found a way to integrate the choices you made and the ending(s) into the new game.

 

I don't even care if the endings and such are watered down. If you guys are okay with completely ignoring them and all your other choices, why aren't you okay with a few retcons or "watering downs"?

 

Because if they water-down the endings, with all the ramifications they have for the galaxy, how are we going to be able to take claims of "Your chocies matter!" seriously anymore? 

 

Actually I'll have a hard time taking such a claim seriously after ME3, but nevermind.

[goishen]

I think what we're gonna see is more like what they've done with the DA saga.  In other words, they're gonna have multiple protagonists.  With each new protagonist uplifting the other, until they can finally become a hero or legend.  Very truthfully I think they're done with a trilogy mindset, capturing less and less people as the series goes on. 

 

And I think that this plays more to the idea that it's going to be much much later than the Shepard series, at least 10-20 years out.  By then it really won't matter what Shepard chose.  Control --  Shep took his band of evil reaper forces away and hid them in a distant part of dark space until the galaxy needs him again, Destroy --  All the races rallied together and found all the pieces of their own Mass Effect Relay and put them back together.  5, 10 years, tops.  Synthesis --  As I've said before, races started breeding along the most pure of their lines, ("I didn't ask for this") and now we're starting to see the effects of that breeding.  OR!   How about this.  Synthesis --  We all know that synthesis is the joining of organics and AI, right?  How about Make it so that every other race doesn't get as much AI ?  Starting at earth, and dropping a penny into a pond.  Thessia wouldn't get much, or Palaven.  But that would mean that the Krogan would gain a lot of it.  Hmmm, never stated it was a perfect idea.

 

I dunno.  These are just my two cents, but I really think this is the way that BioWare is gonna go.

[DextroDNA]

Because if they water-down the endings, with all the ramifications they have for the galaxy, how are we going to be able to take claims of "Your chocies matter!" seriously anymore? 

 

Actually I'll have a hard time taking such a claim seriously after ME3, but nevermind.

Don't you see the contradiction you're making? What your proposing does the exact same thing - it means your choices don't matter. So what would be the difference, in the end? Apart from the Ark Theory taking us away from the whole world they've been building for 7 years.

[Mcfly616]

The difference would be that it's completely pointless to create a sequel to something you're not even acknowledging happened. If that's what you want, then what you're looking for is an alternate universe, or something set in the current timeline. It sure isn't a sequel.

[ZipZap2000]

New theory: "The Shepard" is a story and none of your choices mattered to begin with, because Buzz Aldrin made it up....

[Mcfly616]

Not new... 

[Iakus]

New theory: "The Shepard" is a story and none of your choices mattered to begin with, because Buzz Aldrin made it up....

Codex Entry:  Commander Shepard "The First Human Spectre" is a fictional character and the subject of several interactive films published by Tethras Enterprises. These films were wildly popular due at least in part to the player being able to customize Shepard, from gender to appearance.  Shepard could even have romances with several of the colorful cast of characters.  The viewer was able to experience the adventures using Shepard as an avatar, making choices for Shepard and customizing the story to suit individual tastes

 

Over its five year run, numerous adventures where made available for Shepard's fans to experience.  Though the central plot involved foiling the "Reapers" a mythological race of sentient AIs the films credited for the extinction of the Protheans. 

 

Shepard's run ended with the so-called "Shepard Incident".  The conclusion of the final film was considered so controversial that it caused an unprecedented uproar which even a re-released ending could not quell.    

 

Currently Tethras Enterprises has no plans to bring back Shepard for other stories.  However, they are looking into the licensing Blasto for a new series

[Vazgen]

This... I can live with that

[Iakus]

Don't you see the contradiction you're making? What your proposing does the exact same thing - it means your choices don't matter. So what would be the difference, in the end? Apart from the Ark Theory taking us away from the whole world they've been building for 7 years.

No.  Your choices would matter for this story (at least as much as they already do).  They'd matter in the three game arc centered on Shepard.  If they did a clean slate, then it will be a totally new story with no baggage.  It would be something truly new. 

[ZipZap2000]

Sounds like a great couple of movies.

[Vazgen]

No. Your choices would matter for this story (at least as much as they already do). They'd matter in the three game arc centered on Shepard. If they did a clean slate, then it will be a totally new story with no baggage. It would be something truly new.

So basically you want the game to be set in an alternative universe? Because that's what it sounds to me. Won't it invalidate next game's events? Like "it all won't matter in some alternate universe" For the world-changing decisions that Bioware loves to implement there has to be one world for those decisions to carry the same weight. I'd prefer watered down "rachni-style" ending to that.

[Mcfly616]

So basically you want the game to be set in an alternative universe? Because that's what it sounds to me. Won't it invalidate next game's events? Like "it all won't matter in some alternate universe" For the world-changing decisions that Bioware loves to implement there has to be one world for those decisions to carry the same weight. I'd prefer watered down "rachni-style" ending to that.

Bioware only said your choices would carry weight over the course of a trilogy. They've done that. Anything that happens afterwards doesn't apply.

 

 

What is the purpose of a sequel if you're going to trivialize ("water down") the choices? If you're going to handwave previous events, you're better off fully embracing an alternate universe and an entirely clean slate.

[Iakus]

So basically you want the game to be set in an alternative universe? Because that's what it sounds to me. Won't it invalidate next game's events? Like "it all won't matter in some alternate universe" For the world-changing decisions that Bioware loves to implement there has to be one world for those decisions to carry the same weight. I'd prefer watered down "rachni-style" ending to that.

To answer your question:  Yes!

 

Your "one world" where the choices carry weight will be the trilogy.  After that we have another Mass Effect story, and those choices will matter there.  And so on.

 

If they continue with watered-down, "rachni" style choices, they might as well stop using the import system and pick canons like every other series.

[Vazgen]

Bioware only said your choices would carry weight over the course of a trilogy. They've done that. Anything that happens afterwards doesn't apply.


What is the purpose of a sequel if you're going to trivialize ("water down") the choices? If you're going to handwave previous events, you're better off fully embracing an alternate universe and an entirely clean slate.

The point of a sequel is to show the universe after the events of the trilogy. How they do that is up to them. Even if it ends up like "the implants worn out with time". I don't want an alternative universe where no event from the trilogy happened. Because if it was true for that universe it might as well be true for this new one. What's the point of world-altering choices if they don't even exist in an alternative universe? IMO the trilogy must be referenced in some way, be it a "watered down" endings, complex relations with new colonial government as I already posted in this thread or something entirely different. We shaped that universe, our actions changed it, Mass Effect universe is a place where we decided the fate of the quarians, geth etc. Not referencing it at all will greatly diminish the impact of the trilogy.

I'm a follower of the ark theory without the ark ships and with some relations with Council space (without us visiting there).

[Vazgen]

To answer your question: Yes!

Your "one world" where the choices carry weight will be the trilogy. After that we have another Mass Effect story, and those choices will matter there. And so on.

If they continue with watered-down, "rachni" style choices, they might as well stop using the import system and pick canons like every other series.

What you're suggesting would require rewrite of the lore for the Citadel, thermal clip system, geth will be beyond the Perseus Veil and assumed hostile, humans will be in a minority and will be viewed with prejudice... I will feel weird if the game tries to convince me that the Citadel is Prothean-made. I can't remove the memories of the trilogy from my mind (not that I want to) and every rewrite will be like a sore in the eye. I don't want that for ME:Next

[Mcfly616]

The point of a sequel is to show the universe after the events of the trilogy. 

It's no sequel if the universe isn't as it was at the end of the trilogy. Period.

 

 

 

And by "events of the trilogy", you're referring to the events you want handwaved, watered down and/or forgotten entirely.....

[PinkysPain]

Hm? How so?

 

If there is a part of the universe which does just fine without Reapers or RGB intervention that proves the inevitable AI uprising is slightly less than inevitable. So ultimately the starchild was just an insane brat and the ME3 ending was just a depiction of our defeat and surrender while taking part in his sick little game ... no real meaning to the choice other than a little potential harm minimization we were allowed to do by our enemy.

 

The starchild was ultimately a standin for McCasey and what he told us is supposed to be in universe Truth and it can not be so with the Ark. The Ark violates the artistic intent and integrity of the ME3 ending, such as it is.

[Iakus]

What you're suggesting would require rewrite of the lore for the Citadel, thermal clip system, geth will be beyond the Perseus Veil and assumed hostile, humans will be in a minority and will be viewed with prejudice... I will feel weird if the game tries to convince me that the Citadel is Prothean-made. I can't remove the memories of the trilogy from my mind (not that I want to) and every rewrite will be like a sore in the eye. I don't want that for ME:Next

 

As opposed to a setting where the Citadel blows up, geth are extinct, Earth is totally devastated, if not a cinder?

 

Because yes, that's a totally possible outcome of the trilogy. 

 

Besides which, if they go AU, then pretty much anything is possible, not just a rollback.

[Vazgen]

As opposed to a setting where the Citadel blows up, geth are extinct, Earth is totally devastated, if not a cinder?

Because yes, that's a totally possible outcome of the trilogy.

Besides which, if they go AU, then pretty much anything is possible, not just a rollback.

So? If you choose that world state, fine. It just takes longer to rebuild, they'll change the planet description for Earth and put some debris in place of the Citadel. Geth can be rebuilt.

It's no sequel if the universe isn't as it was at the end of the trilogy. Period.



And by "events of the trilogy", you're referring to the events you want handwaved, watered down and/or forgotten entirely.....

I'm not sure you follow. The universe is the same as it was in the end of the trilogy. If you read my posts I'm against "forgotten completely" option that Iakus suggests. Watering endings down does not invalidate them as does setting the game in an entirely new area (as long as you reference the events of the triligy).

[fyz306903]

The point of a sequel is to show the universe after the events of the trilogy. 

I'd like this to happen, but remember, Bioware have never stated it'll be a sequel. (as opposed to a prequel, spin-off or side-quel). 

[Vazgen]

I'd like this to happen, but remember, Bioware have never stated it'll be a sequel. (as opposed to a prequel, spin-off or side-quel). 

As far as I know they never stated anything about the timeline. That's why we're still having those discussions

[ZipZap2000]

Nothing wrong with a hand wave and dialogue to deal with the whole thing, if it all. Unless you're still searching for your lost ending to ME3?

[Iakus]

So? If you choose that world state, fine. It just takes longer to rebuild, they'll change the planet description for Earth and put some debris in place of the Citadel. Geth can be rebuilt.
 

It demonstrates just how varied the end-states of the galaxy can be.  Accounting for all these possibilities is simply too much.  Heck accounting for the states of ME1 and ME2 was too much for ME3!

 

How is a coherent game going to be made that accounts for Low EMS Destroy, High EMS Control, Synthesis, and everything in between?  You'd have to water it down so much it might as well be AU anyway.

[Vazgen]

It demonstrates just how varied the end-states of the galaxy can be.  Accounting for all these possibilities is simply too much.  Heck accounting for the states of ME1 and ME2 was too much for ME3!

 

How is a coherent game going to be made that accounts for Low EMS Destroy, High EMS Control, Synthesis, and everything in between?  You'd have to water it down so much it might as well be AU anyway.

Low EMS Destroy and high EMS Destroy are pretty close. The game can be set far enough in the future so even the extensive amount of time needed for rebuilding from low EMS destroy would've passed. "Now it's up to the survivors to rebuild, to start again" as Hackett says. Earth is a cinder? There are terraforming technologies present in ME universe and there are still survivors, even on Earth. 

Low EMS Control and high EMS Control are pretty similar, just have the Reapers retreat to dark space to further monitor the situation once the repairs are complete.

Synthesis is where the problem really lies but even that can be written, make everyone deconstruct the Reapers (since they are war machines that are no longer needed) and make the implants wear off.

The difference between watered down endings and AU is that the first acknowledges that the endings happened, the second does not. Even rachni situation acknowledged your choice in ME1 (you got either the queen or a breeder). 

[themikefest]

low ems(above 1750) and high ems destroy are the same except the time it will take to rebuild

 

low ems destroy(below 1750) will take a very. very. very long time to rebuild

 

low ems control and high ems control are the same except the time it will take to rebuild