836 réponses à ce sujet

[Heimdall]

I don't like it because it makes everything we learned and did in all the previous games utterly pointless. All the lore, all the technology, all the civilizations, all the characters, all the choices and connections we made. Just poof, gone.

Of all the arguments against the idea, I consider this one the weakest.

It's all there. It all happened. The lore isn't swiped clean and retconned away. All those characters you met and connections you made didn't wink out of existence because we aren't looking at them at the moment. You just don't get to see the direct outcomes of what happened in ME3 beyond the EC, that's it.

[Kabooooom]

But leaving the galaxy does make everything Shepard did pointless because it renders whats happening there irrelavent. There is no point in saving the galaxy in the first place if your just going to leave it forever and never return. Its fate would be ambiguous (the bad kind of ambiguous) and the EC only gives a breif glimpse into the future its not the end all be all state of the galaxy. Its also worth noting that Bioware did make certain things canon in the past e.g. Udina being counciler, I wouldn't be suprised if the do it again.

I didn't understand this point of view when you first voiced it months ago, and I still dont.

Presumably, this "ark" (if legit leak), was a contingency plan if the Crucible failed. The races of the galaxy likely wouldn't know about it at large. Otherwise there would be chaos, everyone would be wanting a ride out. So saving the galaxy mattered TO THE GALAXY. Even if they knew about it, saving the galaxy still mattered, because the Reapers needed to be stopped. Even if the ark was a post-war exploratory measure, saving the galaxy still mattered...because the reapers needed to be stopped.

Again, you aren't upset by the fact that your choices dont "matter". If you're really honest about it, you are upset because you wont see HOW your choices mattered.

You may find that to be a subtle distinction, but it certainly isn't. You wanted a true sequel, not a sidequel. In both, your choices matter. But only in the sequel do you see how they mattered.

Other people, like me for example, dont care. I am perfectly content with the self contained story of the trilogy and knowing my choices mattered for the characters of the trilogy. I suppose its for the same reason that I am perfectly content with giving meaning to my life even though an afterlife probably doesn't exist. Same rationality. Both the journey and the actions you make matter, even if you dont see the outcome of them.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

 

I don't agree With this. If Bioware would've decided to end the IP With the third game, would Shepard's Story be irrelevant?
I'd prefer to remain in the MW, But I don't think that moving to Andromeda would make the ME Trilogy irrelevant.

No, because it's the end of the franchise. The story of the Mass Effect universe is over. 

 

 

Of all the arguments against the idea, I consider this one the weakest.

It's all there. It all happened. The lore isn't swiped clean and retconned away. All those characters you met and connections you made didn't wink out of existence because we aren't looking at them at the moment. You just don't get to see the direct outcomes of what happened in ME3 beyond the EC, that's it.

I don't care if you consider it weak. That's the reason it bugs me. 

 

You're right. They happened. Then Bioware threw it all away like trash. For some games that's fine, but not when one of the selling points of the franchise is how your choices will shape future games. 

[The Elder King]

No, because it's the end of the franchise. The story of the Mass Effect universe is over. 
 
 


I don't care if you consider it weak. That's the reason it bugs me. 
 
You're right. They happened. Then Bioware threw it all away like trash. For some games that's fine, but not when one of the selling points of the franchise is how your choices will shape future games.

I understand Your point, but I still disagree. Regardless if the franchise is ending or there's another, I don't the trilogy's events are irrelevant.
Considering the choices in ME and ME2 didn't affect much ME3 and its endings (With One Major exception in the Geth-Quarian plot) I don't Really see how their claim Can be considered true regardless of the fourth game.

[AresKeith]

I don't care if you consider it weak. That's the reason it bugs me. 

 

You're right. They happened. Then Bioware threw it all away like trash. For some games that's fine, but not when one of the selling points of the franchise is how your choices will shape future games. 

 

In regards to the Shepard Trilogy, not a game separate from it

[Heimdall]

I don't care if you consider it weak. That's the reason it bugs me. 
 
You're right. They happened. Then Bioware threw it all away like trash. For some games that's fine, but not when one of the selling points of the franchise is how your choices will shape future games.

All that demonstrates is the need for you to see the Shepard Trilogy as a self contained story. This new entry is the start of another.

And frankly you had to see something like this coming with the implausibility of implementing all the wildly divergent choices present in ME3 even before the endings.

[AresKeith]

All that demonstrates is the need for you to see the Shepard Trilogy as a self contained story. This new entry is the start of another.

And frankly you had to see something like this coming with the implausibility of implementing all the wildly divergent choices present in ME3 even before the endings.

 

Yea, ME3 has quite a few Galaxy changing choices to account for other than the endings

 

Granted Bioware could canonize the world state, but the obviously don't want to do that to protect the players choices 

[Kabooooom]

All that demonstrates is the need for you to see the Shepard Trilogy as a self contained story. This new entry is the start of another.

And frankly you had to see something like this coming with the implausibility of implementing all the wildly divergent choices present in ME3 even before the endings.

Exactly. IF this leak is legit, I'm astounded by how surprised some people here are acting. Surely, you must have predicted this. We did, months ago. It was painfully obvious that we weren't going to get a true sequel in the Milky Way.

[Malanek]

Yea, ME3 has quite a few Galaxy changing choices to account for other than the endings

 

Granted Bioware could canonize the world state, but the obviously don't want to do that to protect the players choices 

Although ignoring their choices altogether is not really protecting them 

 

Exploring one possible outcome is actually respecting them significantly more imo. They probably still need to address the genophage as well.

[dreamgazer]

The running assumption that this happened as a result of ME3, the contingency "ark" plan, could also easily be wrong. Perhaps they only set off for Andromeda after rebuilding and recuperating following the Reaper war, far into the future.

[Heimdall]

Although ignoring their choices altogether is not really protecting them 
 
Exploring one possible outcome is actually respecting them significantly more imo. They probably still need to address the genophage as well.

Selecting one outcome and ignoring all other choices is much worse in my view. Letting them all happen offscreen is much better than denying all but one.

[The Elder King]

The running assumption that this happened as a result of ME3, the contingency "ark" plan, could also easily be wrong. Perhaps they only set off for Andromeda after rebuilding and recuperating following the Reaper war, far into the future.

Indeed. We don't Know the reason behind the possible voyage to Andromeda.

[AresKeith]

Although ignoring their choices altogether is not really protecting them 

 

Exploring one possible outcome is actually respecting them significantly more imo. They probably still need to address the genophage as well.

 

They aren't really ignoring it either, if you wanna know the outcome look at the EC

[Kabooooom]

The running assumption that this happened as a result of ME3, the contingency "ark" plan, could also easily be wrong. Perhaps they only set off for Andromeda after rebuilding and recuperating following the Reaper war, far into the future.

Yes. There are three problems with this though:

1) far flung future tech would further divorce the setting and familiarity from mass effect.

2) barring accidental stranding via wormhole or something, a contingency plan is the most plausible reason why anyone would want to flee the galaxy when 99% of it is still unexplored.

And most importantly:

3) It would require canonizing an ending.

I doubt they would take this route, if the leak were true, due to Bioware stating they don't want to canonize an ending and that we "shouldn't think of this as a true sequel", implying more of a sidequel to me.

[Malanek]

They aren't really ignoring it either, if you wanna know the outcome look at the EC

I think they are likely actively avoiding them.

 

I am OK with this. I just think a setting about rebuilding the galaxy in a post destroy game state would be a fascinating story with huge amount of political intrigue. For people who picked the other options, they would get to see what they avoided.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I understand Your point, but I still disagree. Regardless if the franchise is ending or there's another, I don't the trilogy's events are irrelevant.
Considering the choices in ME and ME2 didn't affect much ME3 and its endings (With One Major exception in the Geth-Quarian plot) I don't Really see how their claim Can be considered true regardless of the fourth game.

True, they didn't affect the world much. But they still affected the world, causing there to be a connection between the games more than "This comes after this" like most stories do. But now Bioware is removing that connection from this game. They are removing what made Bioware games special. 

 

In regards to the Shepard Trilogy, not a game separate from it

Except they said the same thing when doing the pre-release stuff for ME3, thus referencing that the choices in ME3 will affect future games. And now we see that it was nothing but lies.

 

All that demonstrates is the need for you to see the Shepard Trilogy as a self contained story. This new entry is the start of another.

And frankly you had to see something like this coming with the implausibility of implementing all the wildly divergent choices present in ME3 even before the endings.

I've been seeing Shepard's story as separate. I knew Shepard's story was over with ME3, unless they did something like IT in which case the next game would be their last. But as for self-contained, no. As I said above, they sold ME3 with the statement that it would affect future games, yet it does not. 

 

As for the other big choices in ME3, there were ways they could have handled it. Just like there are ways they could have handled dealing with the ending. But they decided to purge the trilogy from the lore and start fresh. 

[AresKeith]

I think they are likely actively avoiding them.

 

I am OK with this. I just think a setting about rebuilding the galaxy in a post destroy game state would be a fascinating story with huge amount of political intrigue.

 

They are avoiding them but they aren't ignoring the choices like they didn't happen

 

It would be interesting but we all know they aren't going to canonize an ending just to protect player choices 

[Drone223]

I didn't understand this point of view when you first voiced it months ago, and I still dont.

Presumably, this "ark" (if legit leak), was a contingency plan if the Crucible failed. The races of the galaxy likely wouldn't know about it at large. Otherwise there would be chaos, everyone would be wanting a ride out. So saving the galaxy mattered TO THE GALAXY. Even if they knew about it, saving the galaxy still mattered, because the Reapers needed to be stopped. Even if the ark was a post-war exploratory measure, saving the galaxy still mattered...because the reapers needed to be stopped.

Again, you aren't upset by the fact that your choices dont "matter". If you're really honest about it, you are upset because you wont see HOW your choices mattered.

You may find that to be a subtle distinction, but it certainly isn't. You wanted a true sequel, not a sidequel. In both, your choices matter. But only in the sequel do you see how they mattered.

Other people, like me for example, dont care. I am perfectly content with the self contained story of the trilogy and knowing my choices mattered for the characters of the trilogy. I suppose its for the same reason that I am perfectly content with giving meaning to my life even though an afterlife probably doesn't exist. Same rationality. Both the journey and the actions you make matter, even if you dont see the outcome of them.

Your missing the point, by leaving the galaxy your making its fate ambiguous and it'll only raise question about what happened to it. Did the reapers win? Are there new powers developing in the aftermath of the war? Bioware can't igonre these questions forever because sooner or later they'll have to answer them. Is it ideal? No it isn't but its whats best for the continuity, because having "no canon" while a noble concept is only going to cause more problems when put into practice. The EC can only show players show much of the galaxy and its rather far fetched to assume that its the end all be all state of the galaxy a lot can happen afterwards.

[AresKeith]

Except they said the same thing when doing the pre-release stuff for ME3, thus referencing that the choices in ME3 will affect future games. And now we see that it was nothing but lies.

 

No, they wasn't referencing future games they were specifically talking about the ME3 ending (which some would consider a lie ) 

 

You're taking that comment too literal 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

No, they wasn't referencing future games they were specifically talking about the ME3 ending (which some would consider a lie ) 

 

You're taking that comment too literal 

They said "future games". Those exact words. 

[Heimdall]

I've been seeing Shepard's story as separate. I knew Shepard's story was over with ME3, unless they did something like IT in which case the next game would be their last. But as for self-contained, no. As I said above, they sold ME3 with the statement that it would affect future games, yet it does not.

As for the other big choices in ME3, there were ways they could have handled it. Just like there are ways they could have handled dealing with the ending. But they decided to purge the trilogy from the lore and start fresh.

Um, no, they never sold ME3 with the tag line that it would affect future games. Future of the Galaxy, sure, but they also gave every impression that ME3 was to be the final chapter of the franchise prior to release.

Unless you can elaborate on these nebulous "ways" they could have handled such things, I don't see an alternative that doesn't involve creating a canon or homogenizing the consequences to the point of rendering the choices meaningless.

[Malanek]

They are avoiding them but they aren't ignoring the choices like they didn't happen

 

When I said they were ignoring them I did mean in the next game. If you consider the EC good enough then you can use that argument when making one canon as well.

 

It is likely they are not going to address them in any way. I just find it odd that so many people get irate about using a single story state as a starting point for the next game and pull out the not respecting player choice argument, but are then completely fine with ignoring them altogether.

[Kabooooom]

Your missing the point, by leaving the galaxy your making its fate ambiguous and it'll only raise question about what happened to it. Did the reapers win? Are there new powers developing in the aftermath of the war? Your not preserving player choice by leaving the galaxy your making it pointless because your not bothering to explain whats happened to it. The EC can only show players show much of the galaxy and its rather far fetched to assume that its the end all be all state of the galaxy a lot can happen afterwards.

No, you're missing the point. With the first point about the Reapers: The fate isn't ambiguous, you already KNOW the fate. Because you chose the fate. Anything thereafter is irrelevant. It is potentially plot fodder for a future true sequel.

What you are basically complaining about is that you want a true sequel, and (if the leak is true) you are getting a sidequel. Just like I told you to be prepared for months ago. I told you not to get your hopes up, because you would be disappointed. The outcome was just too predictable. A sequel was never in the cards.

You want to see how your choices mattered in the future of the Milky Way. That was essentially an exact restatement of the post of mine that you quoted. So, not only did I "get the point" in the first place, but I'm starting to feel that you aren't being honest with yourself about why you really want a sequel and a setting in the Milky Way.

Tl,dr: You are upset because you wont see HOW your choices mattered. You then replied to me saying I missed the point because you really wanted to just see how your choices mattered. You seemed to have missed your own point.

[AresKeith]

They said "future games". Those exact words. 

 

Please find the quote where the mention future games, because I know they mention Future of the Galaxy which ME3 does

[Heimdall]

When I said they were ignoring them I did mean in the next game. If you consider the EC good enough then you can use that argument when making one canon as well.
 
It is likely they are not going to address them in any way. I just find it odd that so many people get irate about using a single story state as a starting point for the next game and pull out the not respecting player choice argument, but are then completely fine with ignoring them altogether.

Because not mentioning them at least lets them play out in the player's headspace. Choosing a single story state denies any continuation between the player's personal Shepard and Galaxy whatsoever going forward.