825 réponses à ce sujet

[Guanxii]

dp

[Guanxii]

Well, Shepard's story is done (badly) and the galaxy is left in a number of mutually exclusive states.

 

Asari and krogan could still be alive in a thousand years who would remember.  Heck Liara and/or Grunt could still be around.

 

plus the whole new DNA/Reapers hanging around photobombing everything/potentially extinct races/potentially blown up relays, etc kinda complicates "no canon"

 

Bump the timeline slightly further then. Issue 1 & 3 see below.

 

If humans still exists... refuse is not canon

If in ME4 no green eyes, synthesis is not canon

 

that leaves us with... control and destroy?

 

If it's a new canon non of those endings of the old canon need necessarily be the correct one. Because it's not the same canon no choice can be assumed to have played out in the same way or had the same consequences. You could assume whatever you like - the outcome is the same.

[AlanC9]

So new canon means a state that's outright impossible with the existing games? Well, it's certainly fair to all of our Shepards, since none of them have anything to do with the new universe -- whoever Shepard was in the new canon, he or she didn't even face the same situation as the ones we played.

[Iakus]

So new canon means a state that's outright impossible with the existing games? Well, it's certainly fair to all of our Shepards, since none of them have anything to do with the new universe -- whoever Shepard was in the new canon, he or she didn't even face the same situation as the ones we played.

I could possibly get behind that.

[wolfhowwl]

So new canon means a state that's outright impossible with the existing games? Well, it's certainly fair to all of our Shepards, since none of them have anything to do with the new universe -- whoever Shepard was in the new canon, he or she didn't even face the same situation as the ones we played.

 

Didn't Deus Ex Invisible War do that?

 

Although I hope this game is better than IW, lol.

[Iakus]

Didn't Deus Ex Invisible War do that?

 

Although I hope this game is better than IW, lol.

 

Sort of.  But at the same time, not really.

 

What they did was take all three endings and smush them togther into a single, barely coherent canon.

[Guanxii]

As far as i'm concerned the original series was left unfinished. What we were ultimately presented by the end lacked any semblance of narrative legitimacy due to the writer's poor understanding of academic writing theory. I hope the story can be salvaged one day by professional writers, until then I certainly want no part in retroactively canonizing any of it as it stands.

 

BioWare could and should leave the door wide open for future re-imaginings, reinterpretations and reboots in various media and lets see other creators have a go at putting together a definitive ending while they themselves move on and learn from this mess. Until then i'd just consider what we've got rather unfortunate placeholder material made under dubious circumstances and probably subject to change.  A deadzone in the canon that exists between a mostly great first trilogy and the BioWare Montreal era. I for one can't wait to see if they can recapture the spirit/magic and promise of the first one and do away with as much of the subsequent nonsense as possible.

[Heimdall]

My main concern with the attitude some people have towards what ME:Next should be is about Bioware's ability to create a new story with a connection to ME3.

The last thing I want is for the new game to get dragged down in damage control for ME3's endings instead of developing its own story and giving us a new adventure.

[Majestic Jazz]

My main concern with the attitude some people have towards what ME:Next should be is about Bioware's ability to create a new story with a connection to ME3.

The last thing I want is for the new game to get dragged down in damage control for ME3's endings instead of developing its own story and giving us a new adventure.

But how does Bioware do that? Do they simply "reboot" Mass Effect with the assumptions that ME1-ME3 never happened?

[Heimdall]

But how does Bioware do that? Do they simply "reboot" Mass Effect with the assumptions that ME1-ME3 never happened?

Well, I practically invented Ark Theory, so that's where I stand on that question.

I really think moving forward with this franchise after what's happened requires giving themselves as much of a clean slate as possible. Sure, they should preserve the lore, but distance themselves as much as possible from the actual events of the games and consequences thereof.

If I'm being honest, I want them to treat it like a new franchise but keep the trappings of Mass Effect.

[themikefest]

I wonder if Bioware will have comics to explain some stuff.  Wasn't a comic released after ME3 came out to explain how Liara ended up on Mars?  Didn't they have a cartoon come out 6 months later explaining James destroying a collector ship? I've never read any of the comics or seen the cartoon, but I understand that these are considered canon. Like I say. I wonder if they will do the same for the next game to explain events

[Majestic Jazz]

I wonder if Bioware will have comics to explain some stuff.  Wasn't a comic released after ME3 came out to explain how Liara ended up on Mars?  Didn't they have a cartoon come out 6 months later explaining James destroying a collector ship? I've never read any of the comics or seen the cartoon, but I understand that these are considered canon. Like I say. I wonder if they will do the same for the next game to explain events

 

I expect at least some prequel novel to be released, explaining the events leading up to ME4. Every Bioware game since Mass Effect 1 except for Dragon Age 2, has had a prequel novel released prior to the game's release. Even Star Wars: The Old Republic had two prequel novels. 

 

So assuming that ME4 is on for a Fall 2016/Spring 2017 release, I say that we should have a novel out around spring/summer 2016. 

 

This would help us get up to date in regards to the atmosphere, setting, characters, locations, and culture of ME4 and establish ME4's differences as well as connections to the ME trilogy prior to release. 

[themikefest]

I expect at least some prequel novel to be released, explaining the events leading up to ME4. Every Bioware game since Mass Effect 1 except for Dragon Age 2, has had a prequel novel released prior to the game's release. Even Star Wars: The Old Republic had two prequel novels. 

 

So assuming that ME4 is on for a Fall 2016/Spring 2017 release, I say that we should have a novel out around spring/summer 2016. 

 

This would help us get up to date in regards to the atmosphere, setting, characters, locations, and culture of ME4 and establish ME4's differences as well as connections to the ME trilogy prior to release. 

They might. I won't buy it since its just another way for them to make money. I would prefer them explaining it in the game.

[Iakus]

I wonder if Bioware will have comics to explain some stuff.  Wasn't a comic released after ME3 came out to explain how Liara ended up on Mars?  Didn't they have a cartoon come out 6 months later explaining James destroying a collector ship? I've never read any of the comics or seen the cartoon, but I understand that these are considered canon. Like I say. I wonder if they will do the same for the next game to explain events

All you have to know abut any prequel comics is:

 

Cerberus did it.

[TMA LIVE]

I find this depressing.

 

I mean, logically, why bother to put out a quality story/ending at all, if all that matters is how many people you can convince, cajole, or trick into buying the game in the first couple of weeks?

 

I mean, yeah people had all sorts of theories and idea that they wanted for the ending.  But as long as there were one or more different options added, they probably would have converted some more angry fans.  Instead we get more of the same.  And now three years later ME3 still casts a shadow over MENext.

 

Sadly, that was EA's practice. Or at least until after ME3, and being voted worst company of the year. And with Extended Cut being free, they learned a practice like that will cost them more money. But then again, you get Dragon Age 3, which despite having an conventional ending, it still feels like an after thought. And we're still buying a buggy, unfinished product. So yeah, we're still screwed there. I mean, I know you liked the ending because everything is happy and dandy, but for me, I felt like I bought "half" a game for the price of a full game.

 

I think just adding another choice besides refuse would've been the best approach. As long as the original endings were still valid options for people, and remained in the game, then the fans of those endings could be happy. And for those who wanted to "beat" the Reapers, and not be forced to pick their choices, they'd get an ending they felt they worked for. Maybe not make them completely happy, since the main endings would still have valid points and benefits, but they'd at least pick what was right for them.

 

There's a quote I read from Mac Walters a while ago, which I feel fits the situation about the ending. He said something along the lines of "Some players would tell me, "Yeah, it was sad, but it felt right for my Shepard", But because there was no other choice, it was going to be right for some people, and for others, in the middle, it wouldn't feel right for their Shepard". He was more of talking about Shepard dying. But I think the same applies to choices. For me, the ending was right for me in Extended Cut mode. For you, it wasn't. And ME3 had many choices where you can make the impossible possible by charming. You rarely were put in a situation where you had no way out, and had to pick a side. You instead could create the best outcome for both the Krogan and the Quarians/Geth if you worked hard enough, and charmed everyone. And yet with the ending, the best outcome is what the Reapers what. Not what you want. Like the dialogue wheel the choice chamber reflected, the other side should've reflected Charm and Intimidate, to create the best outcome for "Shepard".

[The Arbiter]

My main concern with the attitude some people have towards what ME:Next should be is about Bioware's ability to create a new story with a connection to ME3.

The last thing I want is for the new game to get dragged down in damage control for ME3's endings instead of developing its own story and giving us a new adventure.

so you are either planning an Ark theory or a Restart of the franchise?

 

 

But how does Bioware do that? Do they simply "reboot" Mass Effect with the assumptions that ME1-ME3 never happened?

They basically can! it's their property which is also my argument and the restart / reboot theory that I have created xD

 

Well, I practically invented Ark Theory, so that's where I stand on that question.

I really think moving forward with this franchise after what's happened requires giving themselves as much of a clean slate as possible. Sure, they should preserve the lore, but distance themselves as much as possible from the actual events of the games and consequences thereof.

If I'm being honest, I want them to treat it like a new franchise but keep the trappings of Mass Effect.

you invented the ARK theory? wow ok so let me ask this question, for the sake of argument Bioware took your theory for real... so what happens in the Milky Way galaxy? ok our new hero moves away from the events in our own Galaxy for the sake of "preservation of life" but we can no longer know what truly happens in the Milky Way? what if these individuals decides to go back to the Milky way wouldn't that be a problem since well... Shepard is the one responsible for deciding the faith of the Milky Way? and last time I've checked we have no idea what the "canon" ending is because there isn't one!

 

if we choose the ark theory wouldn't the Milky Way be scrapped for the sake of moving forward or become a huge plot hole in itself? we could take Guanxii's argument to make the events of 3 as vague as possible and canon but we can still see the outcome of 3 somehow like glowing green eyes and the continuation of species will impact Shepard's decision one way or the other

[TMA LIVE]

Wait there was a class action law suit? XD HAHAHAH my god hahaha I don't believe this really? ._. what a waste of court resources... but anyway people did "feel scammed" so yeah.

There was a lawsuit, a 80,000 dollar child's fund raiser to get attention (which resulted in donators asking for their money back when they realized the money was for kids, and not financing a new ending), and best of all, cupcakes donated to bioware. Green, Blue, and Red in icing (same cupcake, different color).

[AlanC9]

And ME3 had many choices where you can make the impossible possible by charming. You rarely were put in a situation where you had no way out, and had to pick a side. You instead could create the best outcome for both the Krogan and the Quarians/Geth if you worked hard enough, and charmed everyone. And yet with the ending, the best outcome is what the Reapers what. Not what you want. Like the dialogue wheel the choice chamber reflected, the other side should've reflected Charm and Intimidate, to create the best outcome for "Shepard".

Well, that's assuming that you consider Synthesis to be the "best outcome;" it's not like the Reapers want Destroy or Control. Or perhaps I should say assuming that your Shepard considers it best, since different Shepards will have different preferences. And who cares what the Reapers want?

Anyway, my main objection to this line of argument is that it sounds like you want to elevate a flaw in ME3's design to a principle of design; letting the PC always get out of moral dilemmas strikes me as a lousy way to design RPGs. I've got some sympathy for a weak form of the argument, though. The whole series was about letting Shepard get out of making the tough choices rather than having him face them, unless the player decided to screw something up. Well, except Virmire, of course.

[TMA LIVE]

Well, that's assuming that you consider Synthesis to be the "best outcome;" it's not like the Reapers want Destroy or Control. Or perhaps I should say assuming that your Shepard considers it best, since different Shepards will have different preferences. And who cares what the Reapers want?

Anyway, my main objection to this line of argument is that it sounds like you want to elevate a flaw in ME3's design to a principle of design. I've got some sympathy for a weak form of the argument, though. The whole series was about letting Shepard get out of making the tough choices rather than having him face them, unless the player decided to screw something up. Well, except Virmire, of course.

 

I'm not assuming it's the best outcome. I'm assuming it's the best outcome to the Reapers, because that's literally what the Catalyst says. "It's the ideal solution".

 

What I am assuming is that it can be not the best could for Shepard. Or certain Shepards. For Shepard who charms, he'd find a way out. Instead of picking between Tali being exiled, or her father being disgraced, he'd find the option where neither would need to be done. And the ending doesn't reflect that. I do think it should, if given the right amount of points.

[Heimdall]

so you are either planning an Ark theory or a Restart of the franchise?

Yes
 

you invented the ARK theory? wow ok so let me ask this question, for the sake of argument Bioware took your theory for real... so what happens in the Milky Way galaxy? ok our new hero moves away from the events in our own Galaxy for the sake of "preservation of life" but we can no longer know what truly happens in the Milky Way? what if these individuals decides to go back to the Milky way wouldn't that be a problem since well... Shepard is the one responsible for deciding the faith of the Milky Way? and last time I've checked we have no idea what the "canon" ending is because there isn't one!

It wouldn't be a problem, because the settlers will never try to return to the Milky Way. Instead they focus their energies towards building something new, as I believe the ME devs should. We found out what happens in the Milky Way in broad strokes in the EC, we can leave it at that.
 

if we choose the ark theory wouldn't the Milky Way be scrapped for the sake of moving forward or become a huge plot hole in itself? we could take Guanxii's argument to make the events of 3 as vague as possible and canon but we can still see the outcome of 3 somehow like glowing green eyes and the continuation of species will impact Shepard's decision one way or the other

In Ark theory, the ark or arks depart the Galaxy prior to Priority: Earth. What Shepard does in the ending doesn't affect anyone outside the Milky Way, so the endings wouldn't affect the settlers at all. The issue I think you describe wouldn't exist. The Milky Way isn't being scrapped. I don't subscribe to the notion that something ceases to exist just because it isn't featured in the latest issue. The endings and everything still happen, the New Mass Effect will just be isolated from them. The universe s the same, our focus has just shifted.

[TMA LIVE]

Yes
 
It wouldn't be a problem, because the settlers will never try to return to the Milky Way. Instead they focus their energies towards building something new, as I believe the ME devs should. We found out what happens in the Milky Way in broad strokes in the EC, we can leave it at that.
 
In Ark theory, the ark or arks depart the Galaxy prior to Priority: Earth. What Shepard does in the ending doesn't affect anyone outside the Milky Way, so the endings wouldn't affect the settlers at all. The issue I think you describe wouldn't exist. The Milky Way isn't being scrapped. I don't subscribe to the notion that something ceases to exist just because it isn't featured in the latest issue. The endings and everything still happen, the New Mass Effect will just be isolated from them. The universe s the same, our focus has just shifted.

 

I guess you could do the Invisible War situation after Ark. You make a new trilogy about the characters stranded in the new galaxy, and how they deal with being there. Decades later, they find a way back, and when they do, the Milky Way is so different, any ending besides refused could've happened.

[The Arbiter]

Yes
 
It wouldn't be a problem, because the settlers will never try to return to the Milky Way. Instead they focus their energies towards building something new, as I believe the ME devs should. We found out what happens in the Milky Way in broad strokes in the EC, we can leave it at that.
 
In Ark theory, the ark or arks depart the Galaxy prior to Priority: Earth. What Shepard does in the ending doesn't affect anyone outside the Milky Way, so the endings wouldn't affect the settlers at all. The issue I think you describe wouldn't exist. The Milky Way isn't being scrapped. I don't subscribe to the notion that something ceases to exist just because it isn't featured in the latest issue. The endings and everything still happen, the New Mass Effect will just be isolated from them. The universe s the same, our focus has just shifted.

I thought about these ideas too xD well in my Case I created the REBOOT / RESTART THEORY and I got bashed alot by people from all corners of the galaxy xD personally if you ask me? yes I want a sequel! but the problem is Bioware themselves stated that there is no canon ending for 3 and they if I am not mistaken intended 3 to end... ONCE AND FOR ALL otherwise, the same problem you stated above trying to explain stuff with 3 would be a priority instead of a new adventure.

 

If we take the Ark theory yes the events of 3 are not abandoned but would become a mystery or something... because the focus is now centered about the new people out of the Milky Way.. but ok... what if I ask Bioware personally... what happened to the Milky Way Galaxy? xD maybe I'm just being too redundant and annoying xD

[The Arbiter]

I guess you could do the Invisible War situation after Ark. You make a new trilogy about the characters stranded in the new galaxy, and how they deal with being there. Decades later, they find a way back, and when they do, the Milky Way is so different, any ending besides refused could've happened.

Or everyone becomes like that.. crew from Jacob's dad hahahahah

[Mcfly616]

It's not my preferred ending but Synthesis is the solution to the inherent organic/synthetic conflict and is also (imo)  the apex of evolution and the new beginning/ root of the tree of life.

[The Arbiter]

It's not my preferred ending but Synthesis is the solution to the inherent organic/synthetic conflict and is also (imo)  the apex of evolution and the new beginning/ root of the tree of life.

Wasn't this Saren's ultimate goal?