295 réponses à ce sujet

[Mathias]

I'm not here to toss insults your way or call you whiners. I don't think you are, at least for the most part.

 

 

Look.....what the hell were they suppose to do? I understand that everyone has their own preference on how they want the Mass Effect franchise to continue. Lord knows I'll be praying to the gods that this new game will be the start of a new trilogy. But I'm also a realist in the sense that they definitely wrote themselves into a wall, thanks to how Mass Effect 3 ended, and no matter what they did it was gonna upset off a part of the fanbase.

 

If they made a prequel, they'd upset people who didn't want a prequel and wanted the series to move forward.

If they made a sequel and canonized an ending, they'd upset the people who didn't choose that ending.

If they tried to combine all three endings it would've been a mess 

If they tried to handwave the ending by setting the game hundreds if not thousands of years into the future, they'd still have to address the endings in some form. These were galactic, culturally impacting choices. You cannot handwave that, and if you do, then players are gonna complain that they did.

 

 

Their best option was to bring the series to another galaxy. It's true we won't get to see the Citadel, Omega, or any of the familiar places of Mass Effect again. But in it's place we'll have a brand new setting to explore and fall in love with. Remember despite how primitive the gameplay was in Mass Effect 1, we enjoyed it because we were being introduced to a universe and lore that we would eventually fall in love with?

Don't you remember this:

 

 

Do you want to recapture that feeling again?

 

We will be exploring unknown territories, new races, new cultures, lore, technology, etc. If you're upset that we won't see the Milky Way again, I understand. But I encourage you to give Andromeda a chance here. It was the best option for the writers to take in a bad situation. And it opens up so many possibilities. If I haven't convinced you yet, then all I can say is at least wait until we get more info on the game.

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

 

It's a good sentiment, as it's also inevitable that some people will be unhappy with the direction.

[BabyPuncher]

We will be exploring unknown territories

 

Because a galaxy 99% unexplored is so short on those possibilities?

 

 technology, etc.

 

Setting this game 'far into the future' is going to make this significantly harder, not easier.

 

[Jaulen]

I was a ME3 ending hater.

 

Personally I love that they decided to go to a new galaxy/new direction.

Clean Slate as it were.

Will be interesting to see if and how the ME3 endings are mentioned.

There is just no way they really could have stayed in MWG without picking an ending, and making whatever % of the fanbase that didnt pick that particular ending mad.

 

Looking forward to the thrill of discovery. Hopefully will have that same initial feeling of playing ME.

[Jaulen]

Because a galaxy 99% unexplored is so short on those possibilities?

 

 

Setting this game 'far into the future' is going to make this significantly harder, not easier.

 

Just wondering why do you think that?

[Steelcan]

When their best option is "move to an entirely new galaxy to avoid pissing people off" maybe they should re-evaluate their process.

 

They were always going to ****** people off, they should have kept to their guns and worked through the post ME3 universe, not throw their hands up in defeat and reboot it all.

 

I have never seen a developer so gelded.

[Spacepunk01]

This creates so many problems as well. The Reapers would've already traveled to the Andromeda galaxy millions of years ago, and since intergalactic travel has now been confirmed, the logical conclusion is that there must be Reapers in the Andromeda galaxy. A hyper-advanced machine race (AI) will always seek to optimize its efficiency in an effort to eliminate any chance of failiure. 

 

They have existed for millions of years. Expanding their crop fields would increase their harvesting potential, and since their mission was to harvest organic life in an effort to preserve it, it only makes sense that they would expand their operations.

 

I don't think my concerns are irrational.

[BabyPuncher]

Just wondering why do you think that?

 

Mass Effect takes place about 170 years from now. In the future of the modern world.

 

If the next game takes place hundreds of years after that, you're now writing a story in the future of a future. You see how that complicates things? You're building on something that already has a shaky foundation to begin with. (Because no science fiction story can ever be as firm as the real world, obviously.) Instead of extending off modern principles which are well known and you can look up anywhere, now you're building an extension off your extension. You're building a fictional world off fictional world that is shaky and incomplete to begin with.

[Linkenski]

I'm not here to toss insults your way or call you whiners. I don't think you are, at least for the most part.

 

 

Look.....what the hell were they suppose to do? I understand that everyone has their own preference on how they want the Mass Effect franchise to continue. Lord knows I'll be praying to the gods that this new game will be the start of a new trilogy. But I'm also a realist in the sense that they definitely wrote themselves into a wall, thanks to how Mass Effect 3 ended, and no matter what they did it was gonna upset off a part of the fanbase.

 

If they made a prequel, they'd upset people who didn't want a prequel and wanted the series to move forward.

If they made a sequel and canonized an ending, they'd upset the people who didn't choose that ending.

If they tried to combine all three endings it would've been a mess 

If they tried to handwave the ending by setting the game hundreds if not thousands of years into the future, they'd still have to address the endings in some form. These were galactic, culturally impacting choices. You cannot handwave that, and if you do, then players are gonna complain that they did.

 

 

Their best option was to bring the series to another galaxy. It's true we won't get to see the Citadel, Omega, or any of the familiar places of Mass Effect again. But in it's place we'll have a brand new setting to explore and fall in love with. Remember despite how primitive the gameplay was in Mass Effect 1, we enjoyed it because we were being introduced to a universe and lore that we would eventually fall in love with?

Don't you remember this:

 

 

Do you want to recapture that feeling again?

 

We will be exploring unknown territories, new races, new cultures, lore, technology, etc. If you're upset that we won't see the Milky Way again, I understand. But I encourage you to give Andromeda a chance here. It was the best option for the writers to take in a bad situation. And it opens up so many possibilities. If I haven't convinced you yet, then all I can say is at least wait until we get more info on the game.

I'm not angry or part of that crowd but I'm not convinced this will reinvoke that feeling you point towards.

 

I'm not complaining either. You're right. This was the only way without obviously retconning everything but a big part of what makes that picture special to me is the feeling that I'm in the same galaxy as where Earth is. The whole history of how mankind discovered the first relay on mars and all that was something I associated with a lot of the exploration of alien planets in the trilogy... I'm still not convinced this game can give you that same sense of exploration when this association is gone.

 

Just to be clear: Mass Effect: Andromeda is the Batman Beyond of Mass Effect.

[o Ventus]

I just want to know the reason for leaving the Milky Way. In 2 out of the 3 endings for ME3, the relays are rebuilt. In that last ending, it's practically given that they are rebuilt, albeit not confirmed outright. On top of that, less than 1% of the Milky Way has been explored, so it's not like we know much of anything about our own galaxy, there's still almost 100,000 lightyears of ground to travel, so to speak. If it's something to do with resources, again, there is literally an entire galaxy that we already live in.

 

Also, HOW do they leave? Conventional FTL (and even the Reapers' enhanced FTL) doesn't permit for intergalactic travel due to the need to discharge the built up static electricity that is generated through extended use of a ship's drive core, which has to be done while near the surface of a planet. It's a bit hard to do that when you're out in dark space and there are no planets around.

 

Failing all of that, keep in mind that it would take several centuries to get out of the galaxy alone, in addition to the extra time needed to get through dark space and reach Andromeda proper and find a habitable location that may or may not even exist. It just seems like a tremendous risk with no tangible justification and no visible means of actually happening, even in the confines of the given lore, unless Mac 'the Hack' Walters pulls something out of his ass, like wormholes or super-Reaper upgrades to all of the ships that makes the ships even better than the Reapers themselves.

[N7Jamaican]

ME1 was favorite storywise and is very nostalgic for me...

 

The exploration and the new story, discovering new things... Tha'ts one of the reasons why I fell in love with the franchise...  I don't want a galaxy we know almost everything about...

 

I would love for something new.

[In Exile]

I just want to know the reason for leaving the Milky Way. In 2 out of the 3 endings for ME3, the relays are rebuilt. In that last ending, it's practically given that they are rebuilt, albeit not confirmed outright. On top of that, less than 1% of the Milky Way has been explored, so it's not like we know anything about our own galaxy. If it's something to do with resources, again, there is literally an entire galaxy that we already live in.

 

Also, HOW do they leave? Conventional FTL (and even the Reapers' enhanced FTL) doesn't permit for intergalactic travel due to the need to discharge the built up static electricity that is generated through extended use of a ship's drive core, which has to be done while near the surface of a planet. It's a bit hard to do that when you're out in dark space and there are no planets around.

 

Failing all of that, keep in mind that it would take several centuries to get out of the galaxy alone, in addition to the extra time needed to get through dark space and reach Andromeda proper and find a habitable location that may or may not even exist. It just seems like a tremendous risk with no tangible justification and no visible means of actually happening, even in the confines of the given lore, unless Mac 'the Hack' Walters pulls something out of his ass, like wormholes or super-Reaper upgrades to all of the ships that makes the ships even better than the Reapers themselves.

 

1. Soft reboot. It allows them to keep what they like, offer lip-service to the old series if they're ever up for it, while avoiding the minefield that is ME3's ending.

 

2. Wormhole. Alien tech. The last one is bound to happen - even if this was in the Milky Way,they'd need some other species of precursor aliens to keep the space opera plot going. 

[o Ventus]

1. Soft reboot. It allows them to keep what they like, offer lip-service to the old series if they're ever up for it, while avoiding the minefield that is ME3's ending.

 

2. Wormhole. Alien tech. The last one is bound to happen - even if this was in the Milky Way,they'd need some other species of precursor aliens to keep the space opera plot going. 

 

1. But this doesn't require the setting to move to another galaxy.

 

2. Yeah, and if they do the whole "ermagerd ancient aliens" thing again, they'll have to ramp up the scale compared to the Reapers (thus inadvertently downplaying Shepard's importance despite having 3 entire games to do his/her thing) in order for it to really "be a sequel", so to speak.

 

And no, let's not assume that Mac Walters is lazy enough to cop out with "lol wormholes" (especially when it is visibly apparent in the trailer that they are utilizing FTL). That is ****ing lazy, even for someone as bad at their job as him.

[In Exile]

1. But this doesn't require the setting to move to another galaxy.

 

2. Yeah, and if they do the whole "ermagerd ancient aliens" thing again, they'll have to ramp up the scale compared to the Reapers (thus inadvertently downplaying Shepard's importance despite having 3 entire games to do his/her thing) in order for it to really "be a sequel", so to speak.

 

And no, let's not assume that Mac Walters is lazy enough to cop out with "lol wormholes" (especially when it is visibly apparent in the trailer that they are utilizing FTL). That is ****ing lazy, even for someone as bad at their job as him.

 

1. There's no other way to avoid green energy explosion, or absolutely all of the cannon you've dealt with here. 

 

2. There was no way they weren't doing that no matter what happened with ME3. That's usual stakes raising stuff. 

 

And my own bet is precursor alien created wormholes. 

[Steelcan]

I just want to know the reason for leaving the Milky Way.

[Steelcan]

1. There's no other way to avoid green energy explosion, or absolutely all of the cannon you've dealt with here. 

 

2. There was no way they weren't doing that no matter what happened with ME3. That's usual stakes raising stuff. 

 

And my own bet is precursor alien created wormholes. 

then they shouldn't try to, move forward in only of the ending states.  That doesn't mean they have to declare the other states non-canon, just not importable like Shepard dying in ME2

[Spacepunk01]

ME1 was favorite storywise and is very nostalgic for me...

 

The exploration and the new story, discovering new things... Tha'ts one of the reasons why I fell in love with the franchise...  I don't want a galaxy we know almost everything about...

 

I would love for something new.

 

I don't understand this argument about wanting something new. The Milky Way galaxy contains over 300 billion stars, which means that we haven't even explored 1% of the total amount of stars in the galaxy.

 

We know almost nothing about the MWG.

[In Exile]

then they shouldn't try to, move forward in only of the ending states.  That doesn't mean they have to declare the other states non-canon, just not importable like Shepard dying in ME2

 

Canonizing any of the endings just will create a huge PR shitstorm, get us all back to doing nothing more than arguing about how **** those endings were all throughout release... 

 

I don't see the benefit. 

[Draining Dragon]

As long as it has connections to the events in the Milky Way (which it presumably does, given that the character in the trailer was N7), I'm happy.

Also, there better be turians. And quarians. And krogan.

[o Ventus]

1. There's no other way to avoid green energy explosion, or absolutely all of the cannon you've dealt with here. 

 

2. There was no way they weren't doing that no matter what happened with ME3. That's usual stakes raising stuff. 

 

And my own bet is precursor alien created wormholes. 

 

1. Yeah, and there's no way to avoid any of the other explosions either, so what is your point? In 2 out of the 3 endings (Control being the other one), the relays are rebuilt, so there is no need to leave. In Control, it's a safe bet that the relays can be rebuilt even though there isn't an outright confirmation. There is literally no reason for them to go to another galaxy that won't be utterly contrived and pulled out of the ass.

 

2. Yeah, and that doesn't address what I said. Shepard had 3 whole games to build up his/her final confrontation with the Reapers and make it epic. "Lol, it turns out there's an even bigger fish" just tosses that all aside and lessens the impact of Shepard's actions. Bioware managed to avoid this themselves when they did DAI. It's roughly on par with DAO in terms of scale and scope, so clearly they can make sequel plots and not make the previous games totally irrelevant in comparison.

 

Yeah, and that's pretty ******-weak narrative construction. From the look of things, they're doing the same thing that Halo did. For the first 3 games, the Forerunners were the apex and epitome of technology in the fiction. Then out of nowhere in the extended universe, they introduced the Precursors, who are so absurdly OP in comparison to the Forerunners that they may as well be literal gods.

[BabyPuncher]

Canonizing any of the endings just will create a huge PR shitstorm, get us all back to doing nothing more than arguing about how **** those endings were all throughout release... 

 

I don't see the benefit. 

 

The benefit is, people get pissed off and get over it, and the endings get stomped into the ground and forgotten like the garbage they are. Instead of BioWare clumsily avoiding the issue for years and the endings hanging on in the back of everyone's mind like a stinking corpse that won't go away. With everyone wondering how things are going in the Milky Way. And in all likelihood it all being for nothing when BioWare eventually goes back to the Milky Way years later with a moronic excuse for why none of it mattered and people being pissed off anyway.

[Steelcan]

Canonizing any of the endings just will create a huge PR shitstorm, get us all back to doing nothing more than arguing about how **** those endings were all throughout release... 

 

I don't see the benefit. 

They'd get the chance to explore more material in the Milky Way that was begging for more attention such as the Leviathans or other Prothean plans, new races trying to join a galactic community ravaged by the reapers, or any of the 99% of the galaxy not explored, or areas we haven't seen enough of such as the Deep Terminus or council species space, not to mention the implications of events in ME3 such as the genophage cure or the survival of the rachni,

[Wonderllama4]

You won't say it, so I will. A lot of you guys are most definitely whiners. But then, there has not been a single Bioware game released that this forum has not hated upon release. Not one. I imagine this game will be the same, no matter what the content is.

[RiptideX1090]

 

Do you want to recapture that feeling again?

 

 

I can only speak for myself, but no. Driving a rover around on an empty sandbox is not what Mass Effect was ever about. It was about finding humanity's place amidst the stars, about a galaxy full of different peoples and possibilities, about moral quandries and people you grew to care about.

 

Driving the Mako around was literally the most banal, uninteresting, vapid part of the original Mass Effect. I am all for the exploration angle, but there is so much to explore in the Milky Way. We could of gotten into the politics of expansion with the krogan, how the turians are dealing with that, the fallout from the war...

 

I'm sorry, but when it comes down to it... driving the mako around in different sandboxes ala Inquisition isn't worth discarding the setting of Mass Effect. Which is what this says to me they're doing. We can never reconcile the endings. We will never go back there.

 

If other people are hyped, hey, go for it guys, really. But please forgive me if the idea that the setting of Mass Effect I fell in love with being something I never get to go back to makes me a bit sad.

[In Exile]

1. Yeah, and there's no way to avoid any of the other explosions either, so what is your point? In 2 out of the 3 endings (Control being the other one), the relays are rebuilt, so there is no need to leave. In Control, it's a safe bet that the relays can be rebuilt even though there isn't an outright confirmation. There is literally no reason for them to go to another galaxy that won't be utterly contrived and pulled out of the ass.

 

2. Yeah, and that doesn't address what I said. Shepard had 3 whole games to build up his/her final confrontation with the Reapers and make it epic. "Lol, it turns out there's an even bigger fish" just tosses that all aside and lessens the impact of Shepard's actions. Bioware managed to avoid this themselves when they did DAI. It's roughly on par with DAO in terms of scale and scope, so clearly they can make sequel plots and not make the previous games totally irrelevant in comparison.

 

Yeah, and that's pretty ******-weak narrative construction. From the look of things, they're doing the same thing that Halo did. For the first 3 games, the Forerunners were the apex and epitome of technology in the fiction. Then out of nowhere in the extended universe, they introduced the Precursors, who are so absurdly OP in comparison to the Forerunners that they may as well be literal gods.

 

1. I've already said what the reason to go is: to avoid actually dealing with the hot garbage they've created. In control, you have the Shepardlyst as the genocidal (or omnicidal) overlord of the galaxy. So there are three options: either the whole plot is reapers all over again, there'll never be anything noneworthy again because Shepardlyst will just step in to stop anything form developing (like a war), or we're reduced to absentee ******* god, and the whole plot gets ignored. In destory, you've just removed all AI, and since you're against any precursor race, you've just reduced ME to some small scale political plot. How is that any better? It's just a whole game about Cerberus or its equivalent. 

 

2. DA:I absolutely raised the stakes over DA:O. I'm not going to debate that plot with you here, but as In Hushed Whispers showed, the Breach was much greater as a threat vs. the blight.