2122 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

The cutscene shows only half of the galaxy affected. That the wave affects the entire galaxy is a logical extrapolation. But if the writers decide to lock a portion of the galaxy with a damaged/destroyed relay, it won't contradict the ending. Reapers take their time with harvest. They, for example, didn't start harvest of the asari until later in the game and didn't even start harvesting salarians if I'm not mistaken. It is possible that they simply didn't get to that part of the galaxy.

 

By the time you are on the final mission I believe the Salarians have begun to be harvested right then and there.

 

Regardless, does it really matter that much what the effects were with the crucible?

[Iakus]

I'd say the cutscene obviously shows that the whole galaxy is affected. Every splosion covers big areas and the wavefront travels with extreme FTL velocity.

The whole ending wouldn't make much sense otherwise, would it?

The ending doesn't make much sense with FTL-speed explosions either.  

 

Regardless, yes, that is definitely supposed to be the implication.  That the whole galaxy was affected.  But I won't shed any tears if it turns out not to be the case.

[Nitrocuban]

Yeah, well, ME is full of  space magic, I know.

But what I meant was: Imagine the Destroy ending without the whole galaxy being affected. Or Synthesis.

Not working. It actually contradicts the whole thing of having the final choice about the organic/synthetic conflict making it totally meaningless what button we press in th end. The Reaprs would just keep doin their stuff with or without 5% loss.

Scale in SF is always a difficult thing, but in this case the intended scale (milkyway) is pretty clear, forced by the narrative and heavily implied in the last cutscene we get to see.

[Pasquale1234]

Wouldn't be surprised if there are star clusters in between relay's that the network doesn't account for.

Account for? Not sure what that means in this context.

The Leviathan tells us the relays were built to make the harvests more efficient. I'm pretty much going to go with the idea that they built and placed relays in whatever way they thought would best accommodate the efficiency they sought.

We don't really even know how they found anything in our cycle. In past cycles, they took control of the Citadel and were able to use whatever records it held. Maybe they had indoctrinees feeding them info. Maybe Sovereign had fed them a lot of info. Maybe they have some highly sophisticated long-range scanning ability that help them assess and prioritize targets. We don't know exactly how they locate their targets and determine troop deployment. Apparently, it has something to do with whatever the writers feel will enable the story they want to tell. 
 

We did discuss it once, didn't we? The damaged relay idea.

Yes, I remember it. IIRC, the wave would need to be relatively flat (instead of spherical) or TMW really deep in order for that to work out.
 

Or they can homogenize endings into one, preserving only minor differences, like they did with the rachni.
They have options, the key here is to figure out which option is the least antagonizing and fitting with their vision for the next game.

Good luck with that.

Personally, I'd find the idea that the Crucible wave did not reach all parts of TMW and left some pockets unaffected much more contrived and annoying than whatever they might need to do to get us to another galaxy. ME3: Look, there goes the wave, covering the entire galaxy via mass relays. MENext: Ha! We were just kidding. Batteries and parts of the galaxy not included.
 

They, for example, didn't start harvest of the asari until later in the game and didn't even start harvesting salarians if I'm not mistaken.

They were in asari space from the get-go, attacking colonies. A population of natural biotics makes things a good bit more difficult for reaper ground forces, so perhaps they were trying to wreck the economy, cut off supply lines, dampen morale, etc. - or maybe they were just waiting for more troops to be manufactured and ships to complete their work elsewhere, before they targeted Thessia proper.

[themikefest]

 

Regardless, yes, that is definitely supposed to be the implication.  That the whole galaxy was affected.  But I won't shed any tears if it turns out not to be the case.

Its possible the wave of whatever never reached every part of the galaxy.

 

During the low ems destroy ending, ems below 1750, the wave scorches Earth, but when the scene shows the whatever planet with the Normandy on it, everything looks ok. Of course the Normandy is severely damaged and the door doesn't open

[Get Magna Carter]

As far as I see there are 2 completely separate discussions here

 

1) an attempt to argue about the plausibility of taking the series to a new galaxy - based on an unconfirmed claim about the Mass Effect relaunch (or spin-off?) being set in a different galaxy - but no information on the method of travel leaving the debate to focus on guesswork.

 

2) people complaining that it isn't a continuation from the Mass Effect trilogy

the thing is stories rarely, truly end but narrations always do.

By that I mean that at the end of a story there is always (except for rare cases) room for more stories following characters from the stories and the consequences of events BUT the telling of these stories always ends  at some point and it is left to the audience to use their IMAGINATION to invent their own versions of what happens next.

Mass Effect 3 had multiple possible endings - maybe all organic beings have been made part synthetic and vice-versa, maybe the reapers were destroyed, maybe the reapers wiped out all organic species in the Galaxy.

It is impossible to continue sensibly from all these possibilities - any attempt to standardise the galaxy enough to produce a game consistent with almost all the possibilities will contradict players choices/experiences or water them down to make even the big decisions irrelevant - players get upset when this is done to small decisions.  Doing it to the big decisions would be much worse.

[Sion1138]

It is impossible to continue sensibly from all these possibilities - any attempt to standardise the galaxy enough to produce a game consistent with almost all the possibilities will contradict players choices/experiences or water them down to make even the big decisions irrelevant - players get upset when this is done to small decisions.  Doing it to the big decisions would be much worse.

 

A good portion of players will be upset either way.

 

I merely argue that it would be far more interesting to continue the story within the already established setting through the addition of new variables and conditions rather than to strip the whole thing down to its basics and essentially start from square one.

 

Insisting on the indefinite preservation of one's choices seems highly irrational.

[Nitrocuban]

There is no "established setting" left after ME3. And EC made it even clearer.

What ever the future of the  post ME3 galaxy is, it is up to our imagination and nothing to be told in a game called ME4.

Get over it, guys.

[Vazgen]

@Nitrocuban - The idea is that the Reapers don't manage to get to that secluded space. As for synthetic vs organic conflict, moving to another galaxy doesn't solve it either.

@Pasquale1234 - I go with TMW being deep. I'm not saying it'll be less contrived or annoying (regardless of me not agreeing with this). I'm merely saying that they have options to set the game in Milky Way without addressing trilogy choices. I'm not debating how well they'll be received. As for the Reapers not being there, there are safe systems that only get Reaper icon on them after Cerberus HQ. I brought the example to illustrate that the Reapers are not present in the entire Milky Way (which should not be possible based on simple math).

[Get Magna Carter]

A good portion of players will be upset either way.

 

I merely argue that it would be far more interesting to continue the story within the already established setting through the addition of new variables and conditions rather than to strip the whole thing down to its basics and essentially start from square one.

 

Insisting on the indefinite preservation of one's choices seems highly irrational.

If players chose the refusal ending then everyone is dead.  the reapers wipe out all the established races from the milky way

what are the new variables and conditions you would add to continue from this?

[Pasquale1234]

@Pasquale1234 - I go with TMW being deep. I'm not saying it'll be less contrived or annoying (regardless of me not agreeing with this). I'm merely saying that they have options to set the game in Milky Way without addressing trilogy choices.

I'd imagine they're aware of that - and probably have better ideas about it than we'll ever come up with.
 

I'm not debating how well they'll be received. As for the Reapers not being there, there are safe systems that only get Reaper icon on them after Cerberus HQ. I brought the example to illustrate that the Reapers are not present in the entire Milky Way (which should not be possible based on simple math).

At any given moment in time, sure. They can't be everywhere at once.

But here's the thing: Some people are insisting they create some sort of bridge between the ending of the trilogy and whatever comes next. I'm not sure whether that's a reasonable - or even desirable - expectation. I suspect that despite their best efforts, some people would still not be satisfied with the explanations.

Let's look at the trilogy's premise. I mean, really - LOOK AT IT:
-- In 2147, humanity discovered trace amounts of eezo - a previously unknown substance - on Mars
-- In 2148, humans found Prothean archives (an unknown language) and technology on Mars, and voila! Mass effect technology and FTL travel.
-- In 2149, Charon is found to be a mass relay, we somehow knew what to do with it, and off we go into parts unknown. Also, the Systems Alliance is formed.
-- In 2151, humanity begins the construction of a massive military fleet and Arcturus Station. Apparently, they'd figured out where and how to mine, refine, and transport sufficient supplies of eezo in the 4 years since its existence became known.
-- In 2152, the first 3 human colonies were planted. This would imply colony ships, freighters, and those modular residential pod thingies had been designed, built, and were transported to those worlds.
-- And a whole lot more...

Now we see that a lot of the same people who accepted that premise are rejecting possibilities around reverse-engineering advanced technologies, building and deploying an ark ship, etc. I don't find the idea of going to Andromeda - with or without an ark ship - any more fantastical or belief-stretching than the initial premise of the trilogy.

And I do remember it stretching the envelope for me when I first started playing it just 6 months ago. But I'm awfully glad I decided to go with it - in spite of the plot holes, wtf?! moments, and other shortcomings, the trilogy has provided me with many, many hours of gaming enjoyment - and many more to come.

To me, the trilogy was a package - fully realized, delivered, savored - and it's a done deal. If they want (or need) to build a whole new setting and lore to deliver a great new narrative, I'm okay with that. Shepard's narrative is finished, the reapers, genophage, quarians-geth resolved, the primary conflicts built into the previous setting have been addressed. New conflicts and new themes may be best served in a new setting.

[Vazgen]

Devs/writers? Sure, I have no doubts about that. But many BSN members don't. I can't count times I've seen someone posting "setting the game in Milky Way after the endings is impossible". 

 

I get where you're coming from, but I think the current situation is different. The example you brought was establishment of the universe, first steps of creating it. It was Mass Effect 1, the first game of the universe. People were more willing to accept those basics as given facts. Now when the universe is already established, people are more reluctant to accept new lore. 

 

Personally, I reserve judgement until seeing the actual decisions they make. I'll be OK with Andromeda setting if a move is plausible within the bounds of the existing lore and does not require too much new lore to make it work. The Ark ship theory introduces 1) a secret project with 2) large funding 3) reverse engineering Reaper technology which is said to "violate known physical laws" 4) in several years to create 5) technology allowing intergalactic travel which is never stated as possible in MEU. Each of these points creates a potential for more plot holes, which will then be filled with even more new lore. That's why I don't favor the idea. If Andromeda is the new setting, I'd prefer a wormhole route, being created due to the Crucible blast and sucking a portion of allied fleets in it. 

[Sion1138]

If players chose the refusal ending then everyone is dead.  the reapers wipe out all the established races from the milky way

what are the new variables and conditions you would add to continue from this?

 

Obviously you would ignore that possibility.

[Sion1138]

 

Personally, I reserve judgement until seeing the actual decisions they make. I'll be OK with Andromeda setting if a move is plausible within the bounds of the existing lore and does not require too much new lore to make it work. The Ark ship theory introduces 1) a secret project with 2) large funding 3) reverse engineering Reaper technology which is said to "violate known physical laws" 4) in several years to create 5) technology allowing intergalactic travel which is never stated as possible in MEU. Each of these points creates a potential for more plot holes, which will then be filled with even more new lore. That's why I don't favor the idea. If Andromeda is the new setting, I'd prefer a wormhole route, being created due to the Crucible blast and sucking a portion of allied fleets in it. 

 

Yeah, exactly.

 

It looks to me like a lot of effort for little return. That's what bothers me.

 

All the work they will have invested into making this work could have gone towards making something much better in the established setting.

 

I'll reserve final judgement of course, and maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised but I doubt it.

 

What it looks like at the moment though is a carbon copy of Dragon Age Inquisition.

[Vazgen]

Yeah, exactly.

 

It looks to me like a lot of effort for little return. That's what bothers me.

 

All the work they will have invested into making this work could have gone towards making something much better in the established setting.

 

I'll reserve final judgement of course, and maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised but I doubt it.

 

What it looks like at the moment though is a carbon copy of Dragon Age Inquisition.

I highly doubt the leak is true in all its entirety. If the game is at such state so all those details can be leaked in a survey I'd think they would've had a title for it. In any case, if the game is indeed at such state, we will get official info at E3. 

[Nitrocuban]

If everything was finished a survey would not make much sense, would it?

Surveys like this show what devs are up to and not what they are already done with.

Not saying the leak is true, but it at sounds quite plausible and in line with everything we know about DAI and ME4 so far.

[Pasquale1234]

Devs/writers? Sure, I have no doubts about that. But many BSN members don't. I can't count times I've seen someone posting "setting the game in Milky Way after the endings is impossible".

Oh, I suppose there are some who have expressed that sentiment. Personally, I tend to avoid absolutes. It is not impossible, but the idea that the Crucible did not affect every part of the galaxy could be pretty unsettling - and no less contrived than a trip to Andromeda.
 

I get where you're coming from, but I think the current situation is different. The example you brought was establishment of the universe, first steps of creating it. It was Mass Effect 1, the first game of the universe. People were more willing to accept those basics as given facts. Now when the universe is already established, people are more reluctant to accept new lore.

But changing lore is not new. Weapons did not need thermal clips until they wanted to introduce that aspect of gameplay. The Lazarus project was never explained. A lot of what Cerberus had by ME3 was never explained - they said they'd used most of their resources bringing Shepard back and building the SR-2, yet they had all kinds of fleets by ME3? The ability to scan / probe for resources and rare artifacts was never explained, but it was in the games. Setting your omni-tool to trace wiring? Eye implants to trace wiring? Heavy bone, muscle, skin weave? Uh, yeah, okay.

The codex notwithstanding, they're going to have whatever technology they need to support the narrative and gameplay they want to deliver.
 

Personally, I reserve judgement until seeing the actual decisions they make. I'll be OK with Andromeda setting if a move is plausible within the bounds of the existing lore and does not require too much new lore to make it work.

If the game looks like something I could enjoy, I don't know that I'll care how well it meshes with the trilogy. I view it as a separate thing, anyway. I think it's easier for me because I wasn't along for the entire ride - waiting month after month for the next game in the series. I bought the trilogy as a finished package, so haven't had the experience of waiting for the next game that will continue the story of the previous one.
 

The Ark ship theory introduces 1) a secret project with 2) large funding 3) reverse engineering Reaper technology which is said to "violate known physical laws" 4) in several years to create 5) technology allowing intergalactic travel which is never stated as possible in MEU. Each of these points creates a potential for more plot holes, which will then be filled with even more new lore. That's why I don't favor the idea. If Andromeda is the new setting, I'd prefer a wormhole route, being created due to the Crucible blast and sucking a portion of allied fleets in it.

A lot of assumptions behind that list, no?

The temporary wormhole premise is also my favorite, as it would dispense with any other attempts to build a bridge between the trilogy and the new thing. It would explain the presence / absence of whatever species they include / exclude. The issues would be genophage status and presence of any Krogan females - which might not be all that difficult to write around.
 

All the work they will have invested into making this work could have gone towards making something much better in the established setting.

Funny you should mention that - because I keep thinking that any effort they expend trying to tie ME:Next to the trilogy would be better invested in the new setting.

[Malanek]

If everything was finished a survey would not make much sense, would it?

Surveys like this show what devs are up to and not what they are already done with.

Not saying the leak is true, but it at sounds quite plausible and in line with everything we know about DAI and ME4 so far.

I'm not saying everything is finished, it probably isn't. But the survey is supposedly for the marketing department. It is so that they know which parts are the most well received so that they focus on those parts in advertising.  

[Vazgen]

Thermal clips, ME3 Cerberus and Lazarus Project have been a source of some pretty heated discussions on BSN Let's just say that not everyone thinks of those as good additions to the universe...

And I would prefer not to start ME:Next with something akin to Lazarus Project which is one the worst elements of the trilogy IMO.

[Vazgen]

If everything was finished a survey would not make much sense, would it?

Surveys like this show what devs are up to and not what they are already done with.

Not saying the leak is true, but it at sounds quite plausible and in line with everything we know about DAI and ME4 so far.

It is in line mostly with DAI. We know almost nothing of ME4. 

The leak included details such as companion names and combat abilities, different game modes etc. It is possible that the survey was meant to probe the fanbase and figure out whether those issues are worth focusing on, but in this case the game is in a very early stage of development and I don't think that's the case. 

[Cheviot]

It is in line mostly with DAI. We know almost nothing of ME4. 

The leak included details such as companion names and combat abilities, different game modes etc. It is possible that the survey was meant to probe the fanbase and figure out whether those issues are worth focusing on, but in this case the game is in a very early stage of development and I don't think that's the case. 

It's in the latter stages of development.  At a guess, I'd say just under 2/3 of the way through.

[Vazgen]

You know what... I'm looking forward to whatever they crank out on their own. I'll give it a chance.

 

 

Keywords: "On their own."

 

Last time they did something without a lot of feedback, we got ME2. It was full of new ideas. And as silly as some of it was, it had something for everyone. I still love it.

I'd prefer them to listed to feedback instead, if that means no more necromancy and less human genetic diversity

[Vazgen]

I would have just preferred them carrying through with those ideas, once they planted the seed. 

 

They seem even more stupid now because they listened to feedback and dropped that angle of the story.

 

 

Everything about ME2 is so halfassed looking now, simply because they listened to some fans. The plot, the characters, etc... all gone to hell. 

For the best, if you ask me.

The characters getting a short end of the stick was due to ME2 decisions, not due to a fan feedback. Suicide Mission in the middle of a trilogy combined with low development time and budget for ME3. Fan feedback actually got Tali back.