63 réponses à ce sujet

[SNascimento]

First let me say I like the Reapers in themselves. Their design is awesome, the way they land on a planet and go all War of the Worlds with their horns and massive weapons is great, the way they convert and "adapt" the many species they fight is something I enjoy too and indoctrination is a very interesting ability.They just look like a competent fighting force. Which leads me to the problem: they were extremely mistreated in the trilogy.

And in a way we could see this coming since ME1. Soverign was nigh invincible, how could we face hundreds like him? So it was only natural that in ME3 they become "weaker", but that I would let pass. The problem is that almost everything we do in ME3 come in the cost of making the reapers look dumb. Every Prothean ruin we found was  a further evidence of their utter inability to properly "clean" a cicle. Liara's vaults surviving further add to this injury. The fact they couldn't stop the building of the Crucible, their lack of use of indoctrination, their total lack of intel, and probably more. So in the end, all those awesome qualities they had become irrelevant. We just cannot possibly believe they kept the cicles going for as long as they did, since you could clearly see how bad they were at it. And if something like the Ark Theory is confirmed, that's one more slap in the Reapers' face. 


With all that said, maybe in the next Mass Effect we don't need this over the top all encompassing threat. The best parts of the Mass Effect trilogy arguably didn't involve the reapers directly. The genophage and geth/quarian conflict were the highlights of ME3 and they were all about know species in the galaxy and their old struggles . So why not focus NME is that? Just in the species that inhabits the galaxy, without the save-the-galaxy plot looming behind?

[BabyPuncher]

You do understand the protagonist actually has to do something? Fight something? The game has to have enemies to engage in combat with? We can't just go around and talk to people for several dozen hours?

It doesn't have to be 'save-the-galaxy,' but there has to be some sort of significant, overarching threat.

[Cutlass Jack]

The main reason we don't need Reapers is that a few thousand skyscraper sized aliens are terrible enemies for a third person shooter. No resolution to that would ever be satisfying, because it was a threat you can't fight without a deus ex machina.

 

There absolutely should be an overarching threat, but just keep it something the protagonist can actually fight directly.

[BabyPuncher]

The main reason we don't need Reapers is that a few thousand skyscraper sized aliens are terrible enemies for a third person shooter. No resolution to that would ever be satisfying, because it was a threat you can't fight without a deus ex machina.
 
There absolutely should be an overarching threat, but just keep it something the protagonist can actually fight directly.

It's certainly very difficult...but 'can't' is a strong word.

[BabyPuncher]

I think that would be a brilliant central theme, if you had a creator talented and technically minded enough to pull it off. A story where the very human and human sized protagonist is opposed to some antagonist with huge spaceships or machines or something of the sort, where the audience is meant to be thinking it's an absolute impossible at the beginning and by the end of the story is convinced it's the opposite.

A theme of the source of technology, so to speak. Does the man stand in the shadow of the building, or does the building stand in the shadow of the man?

[RIPRemusTheTurian]

To be honest, most of ME's galaxy is made up of fictional numbers. We don't need a 'save-the-galaxy' plot, we only need an enemy that threatens the safety of the crew we'll come to know and love. If we pump up the next badguy to world ending just because, we'll get another Cory.

That being said, I bet we'll get at least 3 big and distinct enemy factions, so that the multiplayer quota will be fulfilled.

[Vortex13]

To be honest, most of ME's galaxy is made up of fictional numbers. We don't need a 'save-the-galaxy' plot, we only need an enemy that threatens the safety of the crew we'll come to know and love. If we pump up the next badguy to world ending just because, we'll get another Cory.

 

 

Agreed.

 

If the next game is really about the refugees of the Milky Way trying to establish themselves in Andromeda, then why not just have the main villain be a local war lord? A conventional foe, that is better equipped and better supplied than us at the start, but one that we can conceivably fight without being the "Chosen One" and one that won't completely alter the face of the universe with his/her/it's presence. 

 

 

Giving us another world/galaxy threatening opponent just makes the games feel like a ripoff of Dragonball Z, where each new opponent is an order of magnitude more powerful than the previous one.

[BabyPuncher]

To be honest, most of ME's galaxy is made up of fictional numbers. We don't need a 'save-the-galaxy' plot, we only need an enemy that threatens the safety of the crew we'll come to know and love. If we pump up the next badguy to world ending just because, we'll get another Cory.

That's not going to work. It's a ridiculously low investment. The 'crew' is going to be maybe a dozen meaningful people? We're going to have a plot of carving through hundreds or even thousands of enemies, spaceships worth hundreds of billions of credits blowing up, all over the stakes of the antagonist bent of spending an empires resources to kill the protagonist for some contrived reason?

And what do you mean by 'another Cory'? It seems to me a weak villain, like say, a 'local war lord' is lot more likely to end up as up as 'another Cory.' In fact, the plot of a 'local war lord' who is initially stronger and who we build up our inevitable little empire to beat sounds like an absolute dead ringer for another Cory.

[CrutchCricket]

If it wasn't for the cosmic idiot ball they were forced to carry, the invasion would be thus:

 

"Reapers are approacing the Citadel! I repeat Reapers are approaching the-"

 

And then everybody died.

 

The thing is, no one could've predicted back in 2007 or whenever ME1 came out that the series was going to be successful. They weren't worried about worldbuilding back then, they just wanted a good story so people would buy the game. So they went straight for the cosmic level threat. Which they were then stuck with when sequel time came around.

 

Some more planning of the overall progression could've improved the trilogy tenfold. But hindsight's 20/20.

 

I agree, we're done saving the world. Let's save something else, closer to home.

[Steppenwolf]

The Reapers really only work as a vague concept. As they became more fleshed out they got dumber.

"You aren't capable of understanding us and why we do what we do, human."

"Shepard, let me, Spacebabby, explain why the Reapers do what they do in 3 minutes or less. You might not understand it because it's so stupid and antithetical."

 

"The Reapers are massive, sentient ships!"

"But not really. They're robots made of people-goo inside big ships..."

"OK, they are sentient ships, just forget about that whole people-goo robot thing..."

 

"We harvest intelligent life to keep it alive, or something..."

"But we only want to do that with humans! The rest of the intelligent races are icky!"

 

"The Reapers are unstoppable! We can never win a war with them!"

"But really all kinds of stuff of kills them. Just shooting them in their laser-holes does the trick. Black balls filled with magic gets it done. Get them to control a jiggly cyborg corpse and they go down like a sack of bricks. They're really not that hard to kill actually..."

 

Things like Reapers, which were just Eldritch Horrors in a sci-fi setting, only work when they're mysterious and unknowable. You don't even know what most of the Eldritch Horrors and the various accompanying creatures look like but they're terrifying all the same. 

It's time for something new and altogether different.

[eldor_loreseeker]

What is a "cicle"?

[BabyPuncher]

"But really all kinds of stuff of kills them. Just shooting them in their laser-holes does the trick. Black balls filled with magic gets it done. Get them to control a jiggly cyborg corpse and they go down like a sack of bricks. They're really not that hard to kill actually..."

I don't think "not that hard" means what you think it means.

Yes, a smaller Reapers goes down when it's shot by an entire fleet. I guess building a fleet is "not that hard" because ships grow on trees, right?

I mean, if you have any brilliant suggestions on a better way they could have been defeated if they really aren't all that hard, I'd be very interested in hearing them.

[SNascimento]

You do understand the protagonist actually has to do something? Fight something? The game has to have enemies to engage in combat with? We can't just go around and talk to people for several dozen hours?

It doesn't have to be 'save-the-galaxy,' but there has to be some sort of significant, overarching threat.

Planescape: Torment is a game without an overaching threat. I'm not saying NME should be like that, it's just an example. 

What I'm advocating is a threat of a different kind, a "smaller" one if you will. Internal to the world that we live in. Dragon Age 2, even with all its flaws, is a good example of a story like this. 

[BabyPuncher]

Planescape: Torment is a game without an overaching threat. I'm not saying NME should be like that, it's just an example.
What I'm advocating is a threat of a different kind, a "smaller" one if you will. Internal to the world that we live in.

Yes it is, but the next ME game comes with a lot of demands it didn't.

- It's going to be a shooter where we kill hundreds or even thousands of enemies.

- We're going to have a ship, a crew, and (unfortunately) very likely a whole stupid one-player empire. That kind of scale necessitates a comparative threat to give all of those resources something to do.

- It's pretty much guaranteed to attempt and be a 'heroic' story. (I have serious doubts it's actually going to end up achieving that, but the point is that's what BioWare is going to attempt.)

- It's very unlikely they're going to abandon the style of the previous game of big choices and so forth.

[RoboticWater]

That's not going to work. It's a ridiculously low investment. The 'crew' is going to be maybe a dozen meaningful people? We're going to have a plot of carving through hundreds or even thousands of enemies, spaceships worth hundreds of billions of credits blowing up, all over the stakes of the antagonist bent of spending an empires resources to kill the protagonist for some contrived reason?

 

Mad Max: Fury Road pulled it off. In fact, it was completely intentional that the antagonist burned through all of his resources to kill the protagonist for some contrived reason. It's a story that goes back to the legend of Troy.

 

But I have to agree, there probably needs to be some stakes to justify a galaxy spanning adventure. I'd prefer BioWare try something other than ancient evil, but Mass Effect's tone and intense gameplay can't easily fit inside just one personal story. Something involving galactic politics/culture should be large enough to encompass TPS levels of shooting without resorting to cliche evil empires.

[MrFob]

Oh, there are a bunch of games that pull off a more confined threat, some do it better, some worse. I especially like those that go down the conspiracy road like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Alpha Protocol.

The appeal here is that the thread is still affecting the entire world there (and I don't have a problem with that ) but at the same time, there is not one overarching enemy with super powerful means. Instead, the threat is divided into a number of antagonists, who may have one leader but still act independently. IMO, this makes the story more diversified, it allows us to travel a lot because we need to counter different threats in different places and also allows for more variety in enemy types. At the same time though, the threat that the protagonist faces at each of these stages remain somewhat manageable and comparable in terms of strength.

I would also agree that you need a rather large threat, if only to justify killing so many enemies on your way to victory (and since ME is probably not going to feature stealth nor non-lethal combat, tis is even more of an issue) but it is definitely more impactful if you can combine that with a personal stake.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

A number of antagonists would be good. No overarching superpowerful enemy.

 

Now with Mass Effect what they have to do with side quests is somehow make them worth doing not just because you need to do them for the experience points so you're high enough level to take on the big bosses. Make them story oriented. Have them contribute somehow and each add something to the main story, not just another Fed Ex quest. I'm so tired of those. It's why I haven't replayed DAI. Also make the encounters leveled so I don't have to do them, and can just go through the main quest if I want without being penalized.

[DeathScepter]

Yes it is, but the next ME game comes with a lot of demands it didn't.

- It's going to be a shooter where we kill hundreds or even thousands of enemies.

- We're going to have a ship, a crew, and (unfortunately) very likely a whole stupid one-player empire. That kind of scale necessitates a comparative threat to give all of those resources something to do.

- It's pretty much guaranteed to attempt and be a 'heroic' story. (I have serious doubts it's actually going to end up achieving that, but the point is that's what BioWare is going to attempt.)

- It's very unlikely they're going to abandon the style of the previous game of big choices and so forth.

 

 

Oh babypuncher, you are a genius.

[AlanC9]

Things like Reapers, which were just Eldritch Horrors in a sci-fi setting, only work when they're mysterious and unknowable. You don't even know what most of the Eldritch Horrors and the various accompanying creatures look like but they're terrifying all the same. 
It's time for something new and altogether different.

I'd argue that putting Eldritch Horrors in sci-fi in the first place is a mistake; in sci-fi you have to explain stuff. Which Bio seems to have agreed with, since from interviews it sounds like they never had any intention of leaving the Reapers as Eldritch Horrors.

[Steppenwolf]

I'd argue that putting Eldritch Horrors in sci-fi in the first place is a mistake; in sci-fi you have to explain stuff. Which Bio seems to have agreed with, since from interviews it sounds like they never had any intention of leaving the Reapers as Eldritch Horrors.

 

Not everything has to be explained in a sci-fi game. There are always things beyond the understanding of even the greatest minds. The trouble comes when you try to explain things in ways that are silly or unscientific though presented as scientific and logical.

[RoboticWater]

I'd argue that putting Eldritch Horrors in sci-fi in the first place is a mistake; in sci-fi you have to explain stuff. Which Bio seems to have agreed with, since from interviews it sounds like they never had any intention of leaving the Reapers as Eldritch Horrors.

The same dichotomy is used throughout sci-fi. Contrasting the unknown against hyper-advanced civilizations only makes the unknown more scary and the civilizations more unfortunate.

 

Besides, Mass Effect was never in the habit of explaining every detail (a habit they probably shouldn't have broken within a certain fifteen minutes), that's why the term space magic is so willingly used on these forums. Not knowing in sci-fi is fine, just be consistent about it.

[Majestic Jazz]

If it wasn't for the cosmic idiot ball they were forced to carry, the invasion would be thus:

"Reapers are approacing the Citadel! I repeat Reapers are approaching the-"

And then everybody died.

The thing is, no one could've predicted back in 2007 or whenever ME1 came out that the series was going to be successful. They weren't worried about worldbuilding back then, they just wanted a good story so people would buy the game. So they went straight for the cosmic level threat. Which they were then stuck with when sequel time came around.

Some more planning of the overall progression could've improved the trilogy tenfold. But hindsight's 20/20.

I agree, we're done saving the world. Let's save something else, closer to home.

You do realize that Mass Effect way back in 2005 was announced as a planned trilogy correct?

So even during the developmemt of ME1 they had a very vague idea of where they wanted to take the trilogy.

[Iakus]

I'd argue that putting Eldritch Horrors in sci-fi in the first place is a mistake; in sci-fi you have to explain stuff. Which Bio seems to have agreed with, since from interviews it sounds like they never had any intention of leaving the Reapers as Eldritch Horrors.

I wouldn't you have to "explain stuff" in sf, unless it's hard sf.  And, of course it's really hard to do "explain Eldritch Abominations"

 

Staying consistent within the science fiction universe.  Now that's important, be it hard or soft sf.  If the Eldritch Abomination violates known science, it should be done consistently, and should be an important plot point.

[Steppenwolf]

You do realize that Mass Effect way back in 2005 was announced as a planned trilogy correct?

So even during the developmemt of ME1 they had a very vague idea of where they wanted to take the trilogy.

Seems pretty obvious that they did not.

[Majestic Jazz]

Seems pretty obvious that they did not.

True, but back in 2005 EA wasnt the publisher and the game was supposed to be a Xbox 360 exclusive.

When EA took over the scope changed and it became more about "expanding" the audience and multiplayer.