825 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

but you can still play them.  Your choices will transfer across the trilogy.  And it will have a beginning, a middle, and an end, as much as they do now, yes?

[CronoDragoon]

but you can still play them.  Your choices will transfer across the trilogy.  And it will have a beginning, a middle, and an end, as much as they do now, yes?

 

That isn't the logic that will be used. Instead, it will be claimed that your choices in totality have been negated. As we've seen from the reaction to ME3, there's no end to which fans will claim their choices don't matter, whether or not that's actually true.

[SwobyJ]

I concur... if you analyze the trilogy

 

ME1 had a canon beginning and canon ending - Story of a commander, then Saren dies no matter what you do in between

 

ME2 had a canon beginning and ending - Saren dies and the collectors attacked! collectors defeated then the reapers attacked! no matter what you do in between

 

ME3 even had a canon beginning but NO CANON ENDING - The reapers attacked! but the outcome is unknown  BIG QUESTION MARK

 

it "seems" or highly plausible that Bioware would

 

1. Restart the Milky Way galaxy and expand to other galaxies for ME4

2. Take the Ark approach and make the Milky Way a big mystery reserved for ME6 or abandon it altogether

 

Canon is that the Crucible was used.

 

(I doubt Refuse will lead to anything really)

 

Hypothetically, in a literal view of what we saw, things could change enough between ME3 and NME that:

1)The galaxy is always rebuilt by the point of the next game, if 'sequel'

2)Reaper role is minimized. Ideas include the Reapers not existing in Destroy, the Reapers reducing in scale importance in Control, and the Reapers no longer even being 'Reapers' in Synthesis.

3)Synthesis green lines are just effects from the initial wave, and after that, in time, the effects fade more into the 'DNA'.

4)We have a united galaxy that advances in tech no matter what. We just decide how much and how fast, but it could always still lead to a generally similar enough galaxy state. Sure, more bizarre if Synthesis, more alien in Control, and more familiar in Destroy, but still similar enough.

 

 

I don't even believe what we saw was all literal (I'm a theorist), but I think it could be done. Whether it'd be done well or whether it should be done... well, I dunno.

[Guanxii]

They've already said no canon for ME3, that effectively means a reboot or something like Ark Theory or homogenizing the ending outcomes (ick). If Ark Theory, then there's no reason to muck about with canons at all. I'm not a fan of a reboot, I don't consider it a step forward in the franchise, more like a step back and sideways. Considering the way such a reboot would have to be rewritten (excising the Reapers and redefining species relations to avoid retreading the same ground as the original) I don't think they should even bother using the Mass Effect name.

See, you aren't the first person to tell me that the series would suffer from shifting to a different Galaxy, and you are just like the rest in failing to elaborate how or why that would be the case. I'm beginning to think its just an emotional kneejerk reaction.

 

Sure Mass Effect probably could deliver a satisfying story in an alternate galaxy but I don't really think it's necessary and I think you would loose a lot more than you would actually gain not taking full advantage of the rich setting and lore details they have crafted over the years of which we have only scratched the surface of. Would it still feel like mass effect without the original setting or would it quickly start to feel like a surrogate off shoot that only superficially resembles the real thing.

[SwobyJ]

What happens if the next game doesn't have that good of a story or sell as well as past ME titles? What will Bioware do?

 

I won't care what they do, because if NME's story disappoints me, that'd be the marker for me to detach from Bioware fandom and pay much more attention and money to other stuff.

 

Instead of spending years on a forum bemoaning it.

[CronoDragoon]

3)Synthesis green lines are just effects from the initial wave, and after that, in time, the effects fade more into the 'DNA'.

 

There's a bigger problem here, which is that any homogenized galaxy automatically retro-invalidates Synthesis as a worthy choice, since if organics and synthetics have the same relationship regardless then there was never a need for the change in the first place.

 

In general, I think people who prefer Synthesis might actually prefer BW choosing one ending and making it the basis, instead of hedging their bets and trying to make all endings canon. Then, at least, one can headcanon that Synthesis was worth the risk because it produced demonstrably better relations than would have existed otherwise.

[Iakus]

That isn't the logic that will be used. Instead, it will be claimed that your choices in totality have been negated. As we've seen from the reaction to ME3, there's no end to which fans will claim their choices don't matter, whether or not that's actually true.

 

And that's why I say ditch imports entirely.  At this point if we have to flush away 99% of the Milky Way because Bioware frakked up the ending to Shepard's story so badly it can't be undone, then I don't want my choices to matter across games anymore.

[SwobyJ]

There's a bigger problem here, which is that any homogenized galaxy automatically retro-invalidates Synthesis as a worthy choice, since if organics and synthetics have the same relationship regardless then there was never a need for the change in the first place.

 

In general, I think people who prefer Synthesis might actually prefer BW choosing one ending and making it the basis, instead of hedging their bets and trying to make all endings canon. Then, at least, one can headcanon that Synthesis was worth the risk because it produced demonstrably better relations than would have existed otherwise.

 

I didn't say organics and synthetics would have the same relationship.

 

I'm saying that the organic synthetic conflict becomes more of a secondary plot dilemma, if at all.

 

And I also don't think Synthesis, even in literal story, is the utopia it presents itself as. The more unification happens, the more disastrous the eventual breakup may be, regardless of how that breakup is caused.

 

 

I think we're in for a story with more organic-synthetic interaction, no matter the decision made. What I'm curious about is the context surrounding it.

[SwobyJ]

And that's why I say ditch imports entirely.  At this point if we have to flush away 99% of the Milky Way because Bioware frakked up the ending to Shepard's story so badly it can't be undone, then I don't want my choices to matter across games anymore.

 

You say that as if they're still in the decision making process about this sort of stuff, in early 2015.

[themikefest]

And that's why I say ditch imports entirely.  At this point if we have to flush away 99% of the Milky Way because Bioware frakked up the ending to Shepard's story so badly it can't be undone, then I don't want my choices to matter across games anymore.

If they make a trilogy, you could just buy the third  game that way you don't have to worry about choices from the previous 2 games

[Iakus]

You say that as if they're still in the decision making process about this sort of stuff, in early 2015.

No, I'm voicing my personal preference.  My only real hope is "The Reapers invaded, Commander SHepard saved us all, now let's never speak of it again"

 

If they make a trilogy, you could just buy the third  game that way you don't have to worry about choices from the previous 2 games

Judging by the default imports for the trilogy, I'm pretty sure I'd be punished for not playing the earlier games. 

[CronoDragoon]

And that's why I say ditch imports entirely.  At this point if we have to flush away 99% of the Milky Way because Bioware frakked up the ending to Shepard's story so badly it can't be undone, then I don't want my choices to matter across games anymore.

 

Imports aren't really related to my point, though. If Mass Effect 1 had been the only game, and Mass Effect Next was the next and was a complete reboot, then the same logic applies.

 

For what it's worth, I don't care if they keep doing imports or not. There are pros and cons to doing standalones vs. imported series and I'm fine with either so long as the game is good.

[Morty Smith]

In my opinion it´ll be more like Mass Effect: New instead of Next. I´ll embrace it as a fresh start and hope as little as possible is said or mentioned about the old trilogy.

[Heimdall]

Having a sizeable population of trilogy races in a new galaxy is going to take quite some time. And after that much time, they might as well stick with the Milky Way and homogenize the choices. There is also no indication of technology that can allow intergalactic journeys in the trilogy. The only species with well-enough developed stasis technology were the Protheans and even their huge underground facilities experienced power shortages and death of the frozen Protheans. And we're not talking about some facilities in this case, it's a journey through dark space with no resources.
I would prefer to have an isolated location inside the Milky Way. Have some section of the galaxy unaffected by the Crucible and Reaper invasion and set the game there.

The feaibility of the journey itself is something we talked about a lot in the Ark Theory thread. We concluded that it was doable, if only just. The Arks would have to be purpose built for this of course, probably with a good deal of reverse engineered Prothean and possibly Reaper technology.

As to the stasis pod question, somebody in the old thread crunched the numbers, it would take several centuries to reach Andromeda at standard Mass Effect FTL speed (Maybe shave off a century or so with Prothean/Reaper advances). Javik proves that Prothean stasis pods can keep one alive for fifty thousand years even with a facility damaged by Reaper attack. We're talking about a much shorter timespan. Sure there might be some losses, but the majority would survive and a skeleton crew of young Asari could stay awake the whole voyage and do what they could to repair failing systems.

[Heimdall]

Sure Mass Effect could deliver a satisfying story in an alternate galaxy but I don't really think it's necessary and I think you would loose a lot more than you would actually gain not taking full advantage of the rich setting and lore details they have crafted over the years of which we have only scratched the surface of. Would it still feel like mass effect without the original setting or would it quickly start to feel like a surrogate off shoot that only superficially resembles the real thing.

I don't think we'd lose anything that wasn't already lost or fully explored by the end of Mass Effect 3, the lore remains. So that isn't a problem.

As to if it will still feel like Mass Effect, in a word: yes. The actual physical locations are the only thing being left behind and I consider them to be amongst the least important parts of the Mass Effect setting, save for the Citadel which has been played out already.

[Fiery Phoenix]

I honestly find it genuinely worrisome that we still don't know if the next game is going to be a sequel to the trilogy (although that seems to be the general assumption).

[Iakus]

Imports aren't really related to my point, though. If Mass Effect 1 had been the only game, and Mass Effect Next was the next and was a complete reboot, then the same logic applies.

 

For what it's worth, I don't care if they keep doing imports or not. There are pros and cons to doing standalones vs. imported series and I'm fine with either so long as the game is good.

 

But it is the point to the setting of the next game.  The ending of ME3 severely limits options if they wish to continue this practice.  And especially if they are going to combine it with "no canon ending"  This would render the entire Milky Way unsusable due to the potential galactic states. without "Councilor Udina-ing" the choices.

 

  Bioware seriously shot themselves in the foot here, on multiple levels.  This is why I say ditch importing.  Too much baggage.

[Fiery Phoenix]

But it is the point to the setting of the next game.  The ending of ME3 severely limits options if they wish to continue this practice.  And especially if they are going to combine it with "no canon ending"  This would render the entire Milky Way unsusable due to the potential galactic states. without "Councilor Udina-ing" the choices.

 

  Bioware seriously shot themselves in the foot here, on multiple levels.  This is why I say ditch importing.  Too much baggage.

'Shot themselves in the foot' is quite an understatement, if you ask me. Frankly, the only practical solution I can see is a Keep-like mechanic at this point.

[CronoDragoon]

But it is the point to the setting of the next game.  The ending of ME3 severely limits options if they wish to continue this practice.  And especially if they are going to combine it with "no canon ending"  This would render the entire Milky Way unsusable due to the potential galactic states. without "Councilor Udina-ing" the choices.

 

I really doubt they'd import saves into ME Next from the trilogy. If the "another galaxy" is true, we'll get vague references to the trilogy and that's it. New galaxy would function as a soft reboot in every respect.

[Vazgen]

 

The feaibility of the journey itself is something we talked about a lot in the Ark Theory thread. We concluded that it was doable, if only just. The Arks would have to be purpose built for this of course, probably with a good deal of reverse engineered Prothean and possibly Reaper technology.

As to the stasis pod question, somebody in the old thread crunched the numbers, it would take several centuries to reach Andromeda at standard Mass Effect FTL speed (Maybe shave off a century or so with Prothean/Reaper advances). Javik proves that Prothean stasis pods can keep one alive for fifty thousand years even with a facility damaged by Reaper attack. We're talking about a much shorter timespan. Sure there might be some losses, but the majority would survive and a skeleton crew of young Asari could stay awake the whole voyage and do what they could to repair failing systems.

Sorry, but that comes out as space magicky as Reapers travelling to the galaxy via FTL and I would prefer the new game not to begin with such issues. You're talking of advancements that outperform anything we've seen in the trilogy by miles and which should be developed in a short time with the galaxy being under Reaper attack and resources are being pulled into Crucible because "Ah, yes, Reapers". 

And timeline will still be an issue. Several centuries to travel to Andromeda, several centuries spent on terraforming and colonization of planets, several centuries on building a new relay network... After that much time they can easily have the ending choices converge into one state and set the game in Milky Way. I don't see how one is better than the other.

[Iakus]

'Shot themselves in the foot' is quite an understatement, if you ask me. Frankly, the only practical solution I can see is a Keep-like mechanic at this point.

 

Well I didn't say what they shot themselves with...

And even a Keep would still have the problems of a green galaxy, synthetic holocaust, Reapers photobombing everything, etc...

I really doubt they'd import saves into ME Next from the trilogy. If the "another galaxy" is true, we'll get vague references to the trilogy and that's it. New galaxy would function as a soft reboot in every respect.

 

Then why bother to relocate to another galaxy?  They could so the same thing from here.  There's a loooooot more of this galaxy that can be explored.

[CronoDragoon]

Then why bother to relocate to another galaxy?  They could so the same thing from here.  There's a loooooot more of this galaxy that can be explored.

 

A few reasons:

 

1. It keeps whatever happened in the Milky Way as still having happened. While this is a negative to you, it is a positive to many for reasons that have nothing to do with an ending. There's a reason so many people dislike the constant reboots and AUs of comics, mostly because they feel it devalues the universe by not having one unified timeline.

2. It allows you to construct new ideas for races, civilization hubs, conflicts, etc. A reboot that still takes place in the Milky Way  makes sense if you keep things like the Citadel and Mass Relays, but at that point it's too much of the same. A new galaxy allows you to try new things and establish new histories, since presumably it would take place enough in the future that any relocation of Milky Way residents to the new galaxy will have resulted in an up-and-running sense of civilization.

 

But in the end, I have to ask you, why shouldn't they relocate? It seems to me the core of your entire preference is to erase what happened in the trilogy so you don't have to think about what happened during the Reaper war. I don't find that to be particularly compelling for why they shouldn't do a new galaxy instead.

 

On my end, the reason why I prefer new galaxy is because I hate alternate timelines. I despise them, and I'll never read an X-Men comic because of them.

[Winterking]

 

I would prefer to have an isolated location inside the Milky Way. Have some section of the galaxy unaffected by the Crucible and Reaper invasion and set the game there.

 

Well I'm not sure if this was actually explained but are we to assume that Crucible wave can expand through inactive Mass Relays? Because as I know, there might be countless Mass Relays that were shut down during the Reaper that might lead to regions of the galaxy that were untouched by the Crucible.

 

So maybe the next Mass Effect takes place in the Milky Way but in a region that wasn't affected by the Crucible.

[shepskisaac]

 

 

Sorry, but that comes out as space magicky as Reapers travelling to the galaxy via FTL and I would prefer the new game not to begin with such issues. You're talking of advancements that outperform anything we've seen in the trilogy by miles and which should be developed in a short time with the galaxy being under Reaper attack and resources are being pulled into Crucible because "Ah, yes, Reapers". 

And timeline will still be an issue. Several centuries to travel to Andromeda, several centuries spent on terraforming and colonization of planets, several centuries on building a new relay network... After that much time they can easily have the ending choices converge into one state and set the game in Milky Way. I don't see how one is better than the other.

 

There's no need for anything more advanced than Reaper tech. They're travelling at the speed of 30 light years per year and they've been doing it 2 years straight without discharge issues. Space magic or not, it's canon now and one of the most important events at that.

 

Time-wise, while travelling at "Reaper speed" the Ark would reach Andromeda or Triangulum in about 250 years. But there are aso 2 Magellanic Cloud galaxies located MUCH closer to Milky Way, barely 16 years away at Reaper speed. Heck, they're visible to naked eye from Earth

 

[Vazgen]

There's no need for anything more advanced than Reaper tech. They're travelling at the speed of 30 light years per year and they've been doing it 2 years straight without discharge issues. Space magic or not, it's canon now and one of the most important events at that.

Good point. Except no race in the galaxy can't even come close to Reaper tech level at the time of ME3. Crucible is the only project of such complexity and as Hackett states, the scientists barely understand what they have to do there.