825 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

Sorry Drone223, maybe you missed the outcry when ME3 was released but the vast majority of the fans agreed (I think the poll was 91% at the time) the ending was bad. That's a large number to win back. You may think the series is fine and I respect your opinion but a lot of us are hoping they rehabilitate the franchise with this next installment. A good ending to ME3 will never come from Bioware, only modders.

But you want a reboot (gleaned from your previous post)? How would a reboot help rehabilitate the franchise? In the spirit of unofficial poll numbers, only a tiny percentage of people wanted a reboot. A sequel was by far the most popular choice. There has only been a single story told in the ME world, I find the concept of a reboot ridiculous.

 

 

I would have been amongst that 91% of people that thought the ending was bad. But all that means is that I felt it was an unsatisfactory conclusion to the ME trilogy, NOT that the eventual outcomes would be uninteresting starting points for the next game. I actually think it would be really interesting to see how the galaxy could be rebuilt following the war and all the political consequences that would come out of that.

[wolfhowwl]

Sorry Drone223, maybe you missed the outcry when ME3 was released but the vast majority of the fans agreed (I think the poll was 91% at the time) the ending was bad. That's a large number to win back. You may think the series is fine and I respect your opinion but a lot of us are hoping they rehabilitate the franchise with this next installment. A good ending to ME3 will never come from Bioware, only modders.

 

I think there is a difference between people who didn't like the ending but either want or would be fine with a sequel and a hardcore crowd that hates it so much they don't want the next game to even acknowledge it.

[Heimdall]

It'd also be contrived trying to avoid the endings altogether.

And that's why Ark Theory is the least contrived of the contrived options. All the endings can still happen, even refuse, and we get a new sand box to play in.

I'm not a fan of a reboot either, we agree on that much, but I don't see a way to build off of the varying ME3 endings that wouldn't strain all credulity since they would all have to come to the same result.

Here's the thing, I don't hate the ME3 endings. I just think suggesting that they all come out to the same result instead of vastly different galaxies completely misses the point of the endings, putting Shepard in a position to shape the fate of the Galaxy. Doing that WOULD destroy, not rehabilitate, the ME3 endings for me.

[Drone223]

And that's why Ark Theory is the least contrived of the contrived options. All the endings can still happen, even refuse.

They may as well make refuse canon if they go the ark route since it also renders Shepards choices meaningless. If the galaxy is going to abandoned forever then there's no point in saving it in the first place, so I'm pretty much in the same mindset as dreamgazer.

[Iakus]

They may as well start a new IP instead since it'll have nothing in common with the ME people have come to know and Bioware are clearly not going to rewrite the lore since rewriting the lore is easier said than done and its a lot easier to work with what's already there.

If it has asari, turians, mass relays, biotics, eezo, and oh, yeah, the Mako,  it will have something in common with the ME people have come to know.

 

ANd they don't have to rewrite the lore, just the Reaper War.  They just need to make the endings not be.

[Maniccc]

 Do you talk about these individuals every time you go on a road trip? Every time you go on vacation or take a drive with someone? Didn't think so.

Actually, I talk about history and various such personages frequently.  But you're missing the point.  The question is not do you or some other certain individuals not talk about these persons, but do people in general talk about them, reference them, etc.  They do, we do, so to ignore that completely in the next game is daft.

[The Arbiter]

Those aren't going to happen since they'll just be contrived, not to mention that if most people lost interest in the franchise after ME3 then Bioware wouldn't be making another ME game. But there is still enough people interest in the franchise so a new ME game was bound to happen.

Maybe EA is just milking Bioware until they dispose of them? I don't blame Bioware for the horrible ending with 3... I blame EA with their strict release schedules and then suddenly retrenchment.

 

[The Arbiter]

There's not too many options for Bioware since they nearly ruined the franchise with their horrible endings. Therein lies the challenge for them. I'm sure they understand they won't make everyone happy whatever direction they choose and the fact that they haven't said anything about it yet makes me worried the direction they did choose is not one I will like.

 

Contrived, awful, or just plain bad, my options may feel that way but what other options are out there? They already said they are not picking one ending as canon so that leaves some parallel story to the main one, a complete reboot, a prequel, or something far in the future where an event took place that renders the endings moot. Again, there's not a whole lot of options for Bioware here and they know it...

I made a thread probably a month ago since the twitter updates made by Bioware. No save imports, ME4 best place to jump into the franchise... I thought to myself welp... it's an "ALTERNATE UNIVERSE + REBOOT/RESTART"  then Bioware defenders told me NO IT ISN'T Bioware can make Mass Effect games without Shepard and the crew because it is their game! agreed but wouldn't that be a spin off? no? then ALTERNATE UNIVERSE + REBOOT/RESTART.  It's their game point taken but in my own observation they are avoiding everything related to Mass Effect 3.

 

One option Bioware can take is to re-write the ending of ME3 and patch it but that is unlikely.

[Drone223]

If it has asari, turians, mass relays, biotics, eezo, and oh, yeah, the Mako,  it will have something in common with the ME people have come to know.
 
ANd they don't have to rewrite the lore, just the Reaper War.  They just need to make the endings not be.

Except the origins of the citadel and the relay's will have to be explained as they are the most important pecies of technology in existence since it enables traversal of the galaxy. Since the relay's are conveniently placed all over the galaxy it's probably a good to know who built them in the first place since the last thing people would want is that the said relay's are part of trap.

Not only that things such as what killed the protheans will have to be explained since they don't vanish into thin air for no reason something or some sort of cataclysm rendered them extinct. Changing even one thing can make things significantly different and making such changes is easier said than done its easier to work with material that already exist than to rewrite the entire lore from scratch in order to suit even a handful of changes.

[ZipZap2000]

And that's why Ark Theory is the least contrived of the contrived options. 

 That we can think of. 

 

Bioware might have another angle. 

[Drone223]

Maybe EA is just milking Bioware until they dispose of them? I don't blame Bioware for the horrible ending with 3... I blame EA with their strict release schedules and then suddenly retrenchment.

Since DA:I has done fairly well EA isn't closing down Bioware anytime soon.

I made a thread probably a month ago since the twitter updates made by Bioware. No save imports, ME4 best place to jump into the franchise... I thought to myself welp... it's an "ALTERNATE UNIVERSE + REBOOT/RESTART" then Bioware defenders told me NO IT ISN'T Bioware can make Mass Effect games without Shepard and the crew because it is their game! agreed but wouldn't that be a spin off? no? then ALTERNATE UNIVERSE + REBOOT/RESTART. It's their game point taken but in my own observation they are avoiding everything related to Mass Effect 3.

One option Bioware can take is to re-write the ending of ME3 and patch it but that is unlikely.

Your jumping to conclusions, it was well known even before the release of ME3 that ME3 is the last game Shepard will be in and that future titles will have no relation to the events of the trilogy. Shepard not being in the next game and having the next game have no relation to the plot of the trilogy =/= the next game will be a reboot. A sequel can have no relation to the trilogy and introduce a new protagonist since the ME universe is a huge place and there are plenty of stoires to tell without Shepard and co.

Excuse any spelling/grammar mistakes i've made since I'm using an iPad.

[The Arbiter]

Since DA:I has do really well I'm not too worried about EA closing down Bioware anytime soon. Your jumping to conclusions, it was well known even before the release of ME3 that ME3 is the last game Shepard will be in and that future titles will have no relation to the events of the trilogy. Shepard not being in the next game and having the next game have no relation to the plot of the trilogy =/= the next game will be a reboot. A sequel can have no relation to the trilogy and introduce a new protagonist since the ME universe is a huge place and there are plenty of stoires to tell without Shepard and co.

Excuse any spelling/grammar mistakes i've made since I'm using an iPad.

But wouldn't the events of ME3 influence the next mass effect somehow? a statue of Shepard? a memorial of his squads? a codex about the history? people told me NO you can just go on without minding the past but that is like totally a REBOOT/RESTART in my own understanding.

 

For Example, the heroes and events which unfolded in Oblivion and Morrowind somewhat carries into Skyrim via books and literature scattered within the game world including artifacts. Bioware seems to avoid that with the next game.

 

Yes we can have a new game nothing to do with shepard but ignoring the history on how the universe was saved? .. BS

[Drone223]

But wouldn't the events of ME3 influence the next mass effect somehow? a statue of Shepard? a memorial of his squads? a codex about the history? people told me NO you can just go on without minding the past but that is like totally a REBOOT/RESTART in my own understanding.

For Example, the heroes and events which unfolded in Oblivion and Morrowind somewhat carries into Skyrim via books and literature scattered within the game world including artifacts. Bioware seems to avoid that with the next game.

Yes we can have a new game nothing to do with shepard but ignoring the history on how the universe was saved? .. BS

it's by no means a reboot as Shepard will exist as a historical person in future titles and the events of the trilogy can be easily be explained as Shepard was the first human Spectre that helped unite the galaxy and defeat the reapers that's all Bioware needs to do in order to explain the events of the trilogy in a nutshell. Its best describe as an indirect sequel that is set after the trilogy but isn't a continuation of Shepard and co. since the galaxy will be able to continue on without Shepard.

[The Arbiter]

it's by no means a reboot as Shepard will exist as a historical person in future titles and the events of the trilogy can be easily be explained as Shepard was the first human Spectre that helped unite the galaxy and defeat the reapers that's all Bioware needs to do in order to explain the events of the trilogy in a nutshell.

THEY SHOULD otherwise it will be a REBOOT/RESTART.

[Drone223]

THEY SHOULD otherwise it will be a REBOOT/RESTART.

Bioware gave no indication that the next game is a reboot, they only said that Shepard won't be in the next game and that plot of the next game won't be connected to the trilogy. Again this was well known before the release of ME3 so it's very old news.

Also worth noting that Shepard and the events of the trilogy won't always be mentioned in future titles and eventually future titles won't mention Shepard the events of the trilogy at all. But said games won't be reboots or AU's they still exist in the same continuity as the trilogy it's just that the games won't bring up what happened in the trilogy nothing more.

[The Arbiter]

Bioware gave no indication that the next game is a reboot, they only said that Shepard won't be in the next game and that plot of the next game won't be connected to the trilogy. Again this was well known before the release of ME3 so it's very old news.

Also worth noting that Shepard and the events of the trilogy won't always be mentioned in future titles and eventually future titles won't mention Shepard the events of the trilogy at all. But said games won't be reboots or AU's they still exist in the same continuity as the trilogy it's just that the games won't bring up what happened in the trilogy nothing more.

That does not make sense... even a 5 second picture of a reaper or shepard can connect the entire two games. How can one say that the events of the past is connected to the future without prima facie evidence linking to the past? it is an indication of a RESTART.

 

Final Fantasy does this all the time with new titles. Same elements of the game, same plot involving crystals, but different heroes, no connection, no evidence to the previous title... restart.

 

Anyway to prevent further flame wars I will rest my case. But I stand with my opinion that what Bioware is doing here is a RESTART/REBOOT if there is no credit or evidence given to the previous trilogy in which case you already expressly admitted but insists it is not a reboot.

[Drone223]

That does not make sense... even a 5 second picture of a reaper or shepard can connect the entire two games. How can one say that the events of the past is connected to the future without prima facie evidence linking to the past? it is an indication of a RESTART.

Final Fantasy does this all the time with new titles. Same elements of the game, same plot involving crystals, but different heroes, no connection, no evidence to the previous title... restart.

Anyway to prevent further flame wars I will rest my case. But I stand with my opinion that what Bioware is doing here is a RESTART/REBOOT if there is no credit or evidence given to the previous trilogy in which case you already expressly admitted but insists it is not a reboot.

Your still jumping to conclusions, just because it won't be brought up in future titles doesn't mean it never happened. The games only need to be in the same continuity of the trilogy and what happened in the trilogy doesn't need to be brought up constantly. So even if the next game has no mention of Shepard or the trilogy then it'd still be part of the same continuity as the trilogy unless Bioware says otherwise and so far Bioware has said nothing about the next game being a reboot or AU.

[Heimdall]

That we can think of.

Bioware might have another angle.

If they do, I can't wait to hear it.

[katamuro]

Your still jumpingbto conclusions, just because it won't be brought up in future titles doesn't mean it never happened. The games only need to be in the same continuity of the trilogy and what happened in the trilogy doesn't need to be brought up constantly. So even if the next game has no mention of Shepard or the trilogy then it'd still be part of the same continuity as the trilogy unless Bioware says otherwise and so far Bioware has said nothing about the next game being a reboot or AU.

 

Yeah but if they "conveniently" forget about everything that happened in ME3 and just move on without mentioning anything at all, its as good as admitting they frakked themselves so hard that they could not find a way out of it. 

[Balsam Beige]

Yeah but if they "conveniently" forget about everything that happened in ME3 and just move on without mentioning anything at all, its as good as admitting they frakked themselves so hard that they could not find a way out of it.

It is impossible to make sense out of that garbage of a ending without a 'nonsense' continuation. Turning MENext into more nonsense with hand waving.

The me3 team tried to explain the nonsense, they failed. I don't want the new writing team to attempt to explain it all over again in MENext. A clear break from the trilogy is needed.

[katamuro]

It is impossible to make sense out of that garbage of a ending without a 'nonsense' continuation. Turning MENext into more nonsense with hand waving.

The me3 team tried to explain the nonsense, they failed. I don't want the new writing team to attempt to explain it all over again in MENext. A clear break from the trilogy is needed.

 

they can explain it, by canonizing something. Or they dont even need too. Basically say something like "war with reapers was fought, our side won, Cmdr Shepard is a great hero to be remembered always for his service". Thats it, no mention of any specifics because whatever happened back then be it synthesis or control or destroy after decades(at least) maybe even more than 100 years it has become the new norm so thats it. True enough it work better with destroy and control. 

 

anyway you cant create a clean break without doing something stupid again like alternative universe. And if they do a reboot they would need to do it in a way that doesnt spell "reapers are coming" 

[The Arbiter]

It is impossible to make sense out of that garbage of a ending without a 'nonsense' continuation. Turning MENext into more nonsense with hand waving.

The me3 team tried to explain the nonsense, they failed. I don't want the new writing team to attempt to explain it all over again in MENext. A clear break from the trilogy is needed.

So that's officially it! ME3 is the last... EVER when it comes to Shepard, Tali, Garrus, Samara, The Citadel, the Asari, Geth, etc. Restart/ Reboot it is.

[themikefest]

The me3 team tried to explain the nonsense, they failed. I don't want the new writing team to attempt to explain it all over again in MENext. A clear break from the trilogy is needed.

I agree that taking a break from the trilogy will be a good thing. It will also give time to come up with new missions, and new story or whatever else to bring Shepard back, only for one more, in the game after the one that is currently being developed. Yes this is speculation on my part. I won't lose sleep if they don't.

[Balsam Beige]

they can explain it, by canonizing something. Or they dont even need too. Basically say something like "war with reapers was fought, our side won, Cmdr Shepard is a great hero to be remembered always for his service". Thats it, no mention of any specifics because whatever happened back then be it synthesis or control or destroy after decades(at least) maybe even more than 100 years it has become the new norm so thats it. True enough it work better with destroy and control. 
 
anyway you cant create a clean break without doing something stupid again like alternative universe. And if they do a reboot they would need to do it in a way that doesnt spell "reapers are coming"

Gamble said no canon ending.

Lack of specifics is a form of hand waving. Trivializing our choices. Gamble said they take player choice seriously. It would be better to not mention the trilogy with current endings at all then to attempt to try to explain or justify them again. And that's what they will have to do if MENext is a sequel.

[Iakus]

Gamble said no canon ending.

Lack of specifics is a form of hand waving. Trivializing our choices. Gamble said they take player choice seriously. It would be better to not mention the trilogy with current endings at all then to attempt to try to explain or justify them again. And that's what they will have to do if MENext is a sequel.

After ME3's endings and EC, I seriously doubt that.