2122 réponses à ce sujet

[ElitePinecone]

If the game does take place in another galaxy, what are we going to do? Explore 1% of that galaxy and then pack up and go to another galaxy and so on and so on.....? Does it mean that the Milky Way will never be visited again?

 

They could set another 100 games in Andromeda, as long as the writers didn't back themselves into a corner by giving us choices that alter the setting in huge, drastically different ways. That was the big mistake of ME3 and now they're trapped by it. Casey Hudson never intended to create a game set after ME3 and he designed the endings around that - they literally change the entire galaxy, permanently. 

 

Now that they are doing a game set after ME3, which wasn't the original plan, the only feasible option that doesn't look like it will break the player's canon is a new galaxy. Players wanted a sequel, a game set after ME3, and the only way to do that without canonising or retconning the endings is to move the setting outside the area that the endings affected. 

 

(Look at what Dragon Age does by moving the setting with each game and giving us choices that are consequential and meaningful in each game without overpowering any future stories that they want to tell. IMO, the DA writers and narrative designers have been far better at balancing the need to have big choices and the need to keep the setting relatively stable so that their development costs aren't insane.)

 

As for never visiting the Milky Way again - I expect if we do, it would be in a sidequel or prequel. I don't know if that would be enough to satisfy the people who really want to see all their favourite characters again, though.

[ElitePinecone]

How about Restart the Milkyway to a fresh state and forget about Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3 

 

This is one of the worst ideas I've ever seen on this forum and I've seen a hell of a lot of terrible ideas. 

[themikefest]

They could set another 100 games in Andromeda,

And they could set another 100 games in the Milky Way, right?
 

as long as the writers didn't back themselves into a corner by giving us choices that alter the setting in huge, drastically different ways. That was the big mistake of ME3 and now they're trapped by it.

Why? They gave themselves a get-out-of-jail free card by having the guy say the details have changed and one more story
 

Casey Hudson never intended to create a game set after ME3 and he designed the endings around that - they literally change the entire galaxy, permanently.

Casey Hudson is no longer with Bioware, so the current team can have a game after ME3 in the Milky Way if they choose
 

Now that they are doing a game set after ME3, which wasn't the original plan, the only feasible option that doesn't look like it will break the player's canon is a new galaxy. Players wanted a sequel, a game set after ME3, and the only way to do that without canonising or retconning the endings is to move the setting outside the area that the endings affected.

Why is that the only way? Going by what the guy said about details have changed, a game right after ME3 can be done 
 

As for never visiting the Milky Way again - I expect if we do, it would be in a sidequel or prequel.

Why? So your choices aren't effected? What choices did you make that you want left intact?
 

I don't know if that would be enough to satisfy the people who really want to see all their favourite characters again, though.

Why not make a poll asking that question?

If they have another game with the characters from the trilogy, they would need to bring Shepard back. I have no problem with that

[dreamgazer]

A prequel and a literal reboot forced to repeat the series' lore, especially involving the origin of the relays, are two ideas worse than this Andromeda spinoff.  

 

I do agree that calling it a sequel when it has no relation in setting, no familiar main characters, and no actual progression of narrative after the ending of the last installment is inaccurate.  But the whole terminology discussion is nothing but a headache, anyway, and it doesn't really matter unless they actually try and brand this thing a sequel to ME3. 

[dreamgazer]

Butterfingers. 

[ZoliCs]

Why? They gave themselves a get-out-of-jail free card by having the guy say the details have changed and one more story

I wouldn't call the extinction of entire races a detail...

[themikefest]

I wouldn't call the extinction of entire races a detail...

What would you call it? 

[ElitePinecone]

Why? They gave themselves a get-out-of-jail free card by having the guy say the details have changed and one more story

 

It's still taking the decisions that people made and saying they don't matter. I *genuinely* do not care how you justify canonising the endings in order to set something after ME3: it's still a bad idea because it undermines the concept that players decide canon. It's also ridiculously contrived, but that's another issue.

 

Casey Hudson is no longer with Bioware, so the current team can have a game after ME3 in the Milky Way if they choose

 

Uh, no. Casey was the creative director of the project, and he stuck around far longer than the time when they would've finished preproduction.

 

The team wouldn't, and couldn't, drop everything and change the story when it was already years into development, game development doesn't even work like that, and it's pretty naive to assume it does. 

 

What choices did you make that you want left intact?

 

I'd like to think the fate of the galaxy and many of its major civilisations are choices that are worthy of being left intact for the next game, but that's just me. Given that, y'know, ME3 was entirely about deciding the fate of the galaxy.

 

Why not make a poll asking that question?

If they have another game with the characters from the trilogy, they would need to bring Shepard back. I have no problem with that

 

Well, for one thing I don't think we're going to see many of the trilogy characters ever again, period. For another, internet polls are ridiculous and unscientific and should be fired into the sun.

 

To be honest I'm not even really interested in the opinions of people who want Shepard back - they're welcome to have that wish, but Bioware will almost certainly never do it, and so asking for it is a waste of time and energy. What does interest me is whether all the people who are attached to the Milky Way as a setting would still be happy with a prequel game that had zero connection to Shepard or any of the characters from ME-ME3. 

 

A prequel like that - one that doesn't involve Shepard at all and has nothing to do with any of that story - is the only way I can see them ever returning to the MW.

[von uber]

As in everything it comes down to the endings.
I agree a sequel was never planned for; Bioware have made a rod for their own backs.
However what is more of a burden is saying that payers decide Canon.
That is fine as it goes, but not where it actively causes such issues that it requires relocating the entire setting. In that event the fans are their own worst enemies.

[goishen]

They could set another 100 games in Andromeda, as long as the writers didn't back themselves into a corner by giving us choices that alter the setting in huge, drastically different ways. That was the big mistake of ME3 and now they're trapped by it. Casey Hudson never intended to create a game set after ME3 and he designed the endings around that - they literally change the entire galaxy, permanently. 

 

Now that they are doing a game set after ME3, which wasn't the original plan, the only feasible option that doesn't look like it will break the player's canon is a new galaxy. Players wanted a sequel, a game set after ME3, and the only way to do that without canonising or retconning the endings is to move the setting outside the area that the endings affected. 

 

(Look at what Dragon Age does by moving the setting with each game and giving us choices that are consequential and meaningful in each game without overpowering any future stories that they want to tell. IMO, the DA writers and narrative designers have been far better at balancing the need to have big choices and the need to keep the setting relatively stable so that their development costs aren't insane.)

 

As for never visiting the Milky Way again - I expect if we do, it would be in a sidequel or prequel. I don't know if that would be enough to satisfy the people who really want to see all their favourite characters again, though.

 

I think one thing that they are doing by going off to Andromeda is distancing themselves from one (of many) word :  tech.

 

You ever notice how in the first game, it's all neat and cool learning about this stuff.  You had the galaxy map to figure out, you had the comm room, you had the mini-map (or radar (or ladar I think they called it)).  Then by the end of the game (in three) it's all referred to as "tech"?  Yah, I mean, there's prolly a reason for that.  Number one, writers are not scientists or engineers.  They can be futurists.  But without an understanding of either science or engineering, they're stumbling around in the dark.  And I mean like at least a bachelors degree or equivalent. 

 

Now, why am I bringing all this up?  Because...   Even if they were to pick a canon ending, there would still be papers written out the ass about the reapers.  Destroy?  Pick up the pieces.  Papers written.  Control?  Study them, keep Shepard here.  Papers written.  Synthesize?  Ohhh yeah, papers would definitely be written.  And there's no way that BioWare would be able to get away with keeping the story in the same galaxy and not referencing those papers.

 

Futurism is great and all...   But I don't think that Isaac Asimov and Phillip K. Dick would be able to write their way out of that one.  And that's writing together.

 

EDIT :  And to be fair, they've kept the DA universe a whole lot more separated than the ME universe too.  In DA, you might be lucky to get a couple'a cameos and maybe five entire lines of dialogue about what has happened before.

[The Arbiter]

This is one of the worst ideas I've ever seen on this forum and I've seen a hell of a lot of terrible ideas. 

why? they did intend to end Mass Effect with 3 right? SO WHY STOP THERE? just restart the franchise! what's bad about it? don't tell me you will miss everyone in Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3 including the Milkyway? and your or our hard work will go to waste? >:3 besides we get to keep Andromeda and Milkyway if we restart the franchise

 

let's see Andromeda -Check

Milkyway -Check

No canonizing endings  -Check

we start anew - Check

Devs can then re-write a new story a new galaxy with new possibilities and may even combine the two galaxies - Check

[themikefest]

It's still taking the decisions that people made and saying they don't matter.

If that's the case, why have the guy say the details have changed?
 

I *genuinely* do not care how you justify canonising the endings in order to set something after ME3: it's still a bad idea because it undermines the concept that players decide canon. It's also ridiculously contrived, but that's another issue.

And I "genuinely" do not care how you can't accept that a sequel can happen in the Milky Way after ME3
 
 

Uh, no. Casey was the creative director of the project, and he stuck around far longer than the time when they would've finished preproduction.
 
The team wouldn't, and couldn't, drop everything and change the story when it was already years into development, game development doesn't even work like that, and it's pretty naive to assume it does.

Do you have anything to support that? You have no idea what Bioware is currently doing. Until they confirm anything about the game, its only speculation
 
 

I'd like to think the fate of the galaxy and many of its major civilisations are choices that are worthy of being left intact for the next game, but that's just me. Given that, y'know, ME3 was entirely about deciding the fate of the galaxy.

Again they should've  not have the guy say the details have changed.
 

To be honest I'm not even really interested in the opinions of people who want Shepard back - they're welcome to have that wish, but Bioware will almost certainly never do it, and so asking for it is a waste of time and energy. What does interest me is whether all the people who are attached to the Milky Way as a setting would still be happy with a prequel game that had zero connection to Shepard or any of the characters from ME-ME3.

That works both ways, right? I'm not really interested in the opinions of people wanting to go to another galaxy. They're welcome to have that opinion if they wish. What does interest me is whether all the people that are attached to going to another galaxy, would like a sequel with Shepard and the other characters after ME3
 

A prequel like that - one that doesn't involve Shepard at all and has nothing to do with any of that story - is the only way I can see them ever returning to the MW.

You just don't want to go back to the Milky Way so you can say my choices mattered whatever they were.

[Iakus]

They could set another 100 games in Andromeda, as long as the writers didn't back themselves into a corner by giving us choices that alter the setting in huge, drastically different ways. That was the big mistake of ME3 and now they're trapped by it. Casey Hudson never intended to create a game set after ME3 and he designed the endings around that - they literally change the entire galaxy, permanently. 

 

Now that they are doing a game set after ME3, which wasn't the original plan, the only feasible option that doesn't look like it will break the player's canon is a new galaxy. Players wanted a sequel, a game set after ME3, and the only way to do that without canonising or retconning the endings is to move the setting outside the area that the endings affected. 

 

 

So it's better to break the lore than to break the canon?

 

 

 

(Look at what Dragon Age does by moving the setting with each game and giving us choices that are consequential and meaningful in each game without overpowering any future stories that they want to tell. IMO, the DA writers and narrative designers have been far better at balancing the need to have big choices and the need to keep the setting relatively stable so that their development costs aren't insane.)

As for never visiting the Milky Way again - I expect if we do, it would be in a sidequel or prequel. I don't know if that would be enough to satisfy the people who really want to see all their favourite characters again, though.

And Dragon Age can't keep this up forever.  Heck I don't know how much longer they'll be able to maintain this after DAI.  WHich is why I say ditch imports altogether.

[Iakus]

I wouldn't call the extinction of entire races a detail...

Compared to abandoning 99% of the galaxy?

[Torgette]

They could set another 100 games in Andromeda, as long as the writers didn't back themselves into a corner by giving us choices that alter the setting in huge, drastically different ways. That was the big mistake of ME3 and now they're trapped by it. Casey Hudson never intended to create a game set after ME3 and he designed the endings around that - they literally change the entire galaxy, permanently. 

 

Now that they are doing a game set after ME3, which wasn't the original plan, the only feasible option that doesn't look like it will break the player's canon is a new galaxy. Players wanted a sequel, a game set after ME3, and the only way to do that without canonising or retconning the endings is to move the setting outside the area that the endings affected. 

 

(Look at what Dragon Age does by moving the setting with each game and giving us choices that are consequential and meaningful in each game without overpowering any future stories that they want to tell. IMO, the DA writers and narrative designers have been far better at balancing the need to have big choices and the need to keep the setting relatively stable so that their development costs aren't insane.)

 

As for never visiting the Milky Way again - I expect if we do, it would be in a sidequel or prequel. I don't know if that would be enough to satisfy the people who really want to see all their favourite characters again, though.

 

This all reminds me of how much MGS2 damaged that series. 2 ended in matrix-esque bizarre unreality with almost nothing to build off of for a direct sequel, so they fixed that by having a grounded prequel that effectively setup the plot for 4 while also using the passage of time to give us enough science-fiction progression to explain away 2's weirdness (nanomachines!). Mass Effect 3's ending is pretty tame by comparison.

[Iakus]

This all reminds me of how much MGS2 damaged that series. 2 ended in matrix-esque bizarre unreality with almost nothing to build off of for a direct sequel, so they fixed that by having a grounded prequel that effectively setup the plot for 4 while also using the passage of time to give us enough science-fiction progression to explain away 2's weirdness (nanomachines!). Mass Effect 3's ending is pretty tame by comparison.

I dunno.  MGS2's ending had me going "WTF just happened?"

 

ME3's ending had me feeling unclean.

[AlanC9]

It's still taking the decisions that people made and saying they don't matter. I *genuinely* do not care how you justify canonising the endings in order to set something after ME3: it's still a bad idea because it undermines the concept that players decide canon. It's also ridiculously contrived, but that's another issue.
 

I don't quite follow the logic of this position. Each of your Shepards makes his or her decisions, which play out in various ways. If the sequel follows what happens in a universe where a different Shepard made a particular set of choices, how does that invalidate the other Shepards' choices any more than they invalidate each other?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You are not coherent.

 

Or you just like to make random irrelevant hating posts in response to anything that shows up on this forum?

Let's leave personal insults out of this please. It's just a game. 

[AresKeith]

As in everything it comes down to the endings.
I agree a sequel was never planned for; Bioware have made a rod for their own backs.
However what is more of a burden is saying that payers decide Canon.
That is fine as it goes, but not where it actively causes such issues that it requires relocating the entire setting. In that event the fans are their own worst enemies.

 

The fanbase has always been their own worst enemy

[ZoliCs]

Let's leave personal insults out of this please. It's just a game. 

There is no personal insult about it.

 

He just spews hating posts all the time, and that particular response to my post wasn't on topic, neither was I talking to him. Which makes that post random and irrelevant.

 

So why is calling his random irrelevant hating post a random irrelevant hating post considered a personal insult?

[Torgette]

I dunno.  MGS2's ending had me going "WTF just happened?"

 

ME3's ending had me feeling unclean.

 

Personally i'm not a fan of a direct sequel anyways, but this whole ordeal makes me feel nostalgic. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

There is no personal insult about it.

 

He just spews hating posts all the time, and that particular response to my post wasn't on topic, neither was I talking to him. Which makes that post random and irrelevant.

 

So why is calling his random irrelevant hating post a random irrelevant hating post considered a personal insult?

The "You are not coherent" part. Perhaps I read it out of context, but that sounds like an insult. 

[goishen]

There is no personal insult about it.

 

He just spews hating posts all the time, and that particular response to my post wasn't on topic, neither was I talking to him. Which makes that post random and irrelevant.

 

So why is calling his random irrelevant hating post a random irrelevant hating post considered a personal insult?

 

 

Because you're speaking to everyone.   Not just the person you quoted.   If you wanna be speaking to just the person you quoted, there is a messaging feature on here.

[ZoliCs]

The "You are not coherent" part. Perhaps I read it out of context, but that sounds like an insult. 

I don't like apple pie.

 

 

 

 

See what I just said in response to you is not coherent, makes no sense in this context. I call it how I see it. Being honest is not a personal attack.

[goishen]

Right, but if I said, "Stop with the vitriolic  & pedantic posts."   That would be crossing a line.   Like it or don't.  He has a point, even if you can't understand that.

 

EDIT :  What his point was, rather.