401 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Yeah, sometimes you have to bite the bullet.

I wasn't happy with ME3 either, but I feel it would still be vastly better to go with that than this sort of half-assed starting over while not starting over.

And I'm not a fan of prequels by any stretch, and would even prefer that to a false sequel.

I just hate false sequels more than anything.

Soft reboots are the best option apart from a true hard reboot to clean gunk created by a gibberish game. There's no way to fix the nonsense of RBG. There's no way to take ME3s endings and come up with an even semi-coherent follow-up. Even if you did end up canonising the ending like some would want you'd get either the same issues people accuse ME:A of having or alternatively you'd wind up with even worse nonsense (like how to deal with the now established eternal race war in a destroy ending).

[AresKeith]

"Let's go to another galaxy!" is not more imaginative then however having the endings dealt with would be. 

 

By having to make three separate games or if they do merge them it would still ****** off more people than moving to a new Galaxy did along with the other variables ME3 caused 

[dreamgazer]

I guess we have a different definition of "ambition".

Do we?
 

I would consider the harder, never before attempted thing to be far more ambitious.

Which would be ... what, exactly?

Canonizing an ending? Attempted, and frequently.

Merged endings? Attempted, less frequently and to mixed results.

Retconned endings? A constant annoyance and the definition of lazy.

How, in any way, is giving BioWare's idea of life to a completely unknown galaxy in the MEU less difficult or ambitious?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

By having to make three separate games or if they do merge them it would still ****** off more people than moving to a new Galaxy did along with the other variables ME3 caused 

Still would be more ambitious and imaginative than throwing everything away and going to a new galaxy. 

[In Exile]

Still would be more ambitious and imaginative than throwing everything away and going to a new galaxy.

Except for the fact that it isn't. Let's say you're right and MEA is basically a new series. Creating a new series is even harder than taking the total gibbering nonsense that is the ME3 ending and making sense of it in a way that satisfies, say, 60% of the player base.

[AresKeith]

Still would be more ambitious and imaginative than throwing everything away and going to a new galaxy. 

 

It really wouldn't

 

Which would be ... what, exactly?

Canonizing an ending? Attempted, and frequently.

Merged endings? Attempted, less frequently and to mixed results.

Retconned endings? A constant annoyance and the definition of lazy.

How, in any way, is giving BioWare's idea of life to a completely unknown galaxy in the MEU less difficult or ambitious?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Except for the fact that it isn't. Let's say you're right and MEA is basically a new series. Creating a new series is even harder than taking the total gibbering nonsense that is the ME3 ending and making sense of it in a way that satisfies, say, 60% of the player base.

No, it isn't. 

 

It really wouldn't

It really is. They are literally running away from their choice rather than deal with it, throwing the entire trilogy away in the process. 

[In Exile]

No, it isn't.

It really is. They are literally running away from their choice rather than deal with it, throwing the entire trilogy away in the process.

Ah, so we're at the "Nuh-uh" and "Yuh-huh" style of argument. Well, I'm going to bow out.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Ah, so we're at the "Nuh-uh" and "Yuh-huh" style of argument. Well, I'm going to bow out.

I'd try to give a better argument, but whenever people get into it you just go "the series was always ridiculous" so there is no point in trying. 

[Sion1138]

How, in any way, is giving BioWare's idea of life to a completely unknown galaxy in the MEU less difficult or ambitious?

 

I don't get this sentence. "Bioware's idea of giving life to a completely unknown galaxy" you mean?

 

Of course it's easier, it's a blank slate.

[FKA_Servo]

It really is. They are literally running away from their choice rather than deal with it, throwing the entire trilogy away in the process. 

 

But now we're back to the beginning. How can they make something coherent in the Milky Way without either canonizing an ending or jumping so far forward in time that we might as well be in a different galaxy?

 

No matter what they do, someone's gonna get upset enough to cancel their preorder.

[AresKeith]

No, it isn't. 

 

It really is. They are literally running away from their choice rather than deal with it, throwing the entire trilogy away in the process. 

 

Are we back to the "throwing away the trilogy" again?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

But now we're back to the beginning. How can they make something coherent in the Milky Way without either canonizing an ending or jumping so far forward in time that we might as well be in a different galaxy?

 

No matter what they do, someone's gonna get upset enough to cancel their preorder.

There were a few fan theories that did so. 

Then have people get upset. Throwing away the endings is better than throwing away the entire trilogy. 

 

 

Are we back to the "throwing away the trilogy" again?

Yes, because that's what they are doing. The characters, the lore, the locations, all of it gone. This is a great example of the phrase "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". 

[Steppenwolf]

Over 99% of the galaxy for starters.

You say that like it means something. Made up stuff in one galaxy as opposed to another is such a big deal? You want them to only make up stuff in our galaxy because there's still room for more made up stuff?

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You say that like it means something. Made up stuff in one galaxy as opposed to another is such a big deal? You want them to only make up stuff in our galaxy because there's still room for more made up stuff?

Except the 99% of our galaxy is pocketed with real stuff, like real stars and nebulae and clusters. Andromeda doesn't even have that much because we don't have technology capable of mapping it to that level of detail yet. And doesn't involve butchering the lore in the process. 

 

This conversation has been had already. 

[FKA_Servo]

Then have people get upset. Throwing away the endings is better than throwing away the entire trilogy. 

 

You mean... have other people get upset, right?

 

Because I'm happy with what they're doing. And I don't think going to Andromeda necessarily negates what was good about the entire trilogy. I think it will be fully present, in fact.

[Sion1138]

You say that like it means something. Made up stuff in one galaxy as opposed to another is such a big deal? You want them to only make up stuff in our galaxy because there's still room for more made up stuff?

 

It's about the value already present there, not about the nomenclature or whether there's room.

[AresKeith]

Then have people get upset. Throwing away the endings is better than throwing away the entire trilogy. 

 

Even a sequel in the MW wouldn't be part of the entire trilogy, it's not like you can't play it again after MEA

 

Yes, because that's what they are doing. The characters, the lore, the locations, all of it gone. This is a great example of the phrase "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". 

 

The lore? would still be there

 

The characters & locations? If we're exploring the rest of the MW then these would still be irrelevant because it's all new

 

So again saying they're "throwing away the trilogy" is exaggerating to a heavy degree 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

You mean... have other people get upset, right?

 

Because I'm happy with what they're doing. And I don't think going to Andromeda necessarily negates what was good about the entire trilogy. I think it will be fully present, in fact.

How? How will it be fully present? I'd sincerely like to hear this. 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Even a sequel in the MW wouldn't be part of the entire trilogy

 

 

The lore? would still be there

 

The characters & locations? If we're exploring the rest of the MW then these would still be irrelevant because it's all new

 

So again saying they're "throwing away the trilogy" is exaggerating to a heavy degree 

The trilogy would have helped shape it. And there'd be familiar places, characters, lore, etc. 

 

The lore is being butchered to make the trip to Andromeda possible by any means other than natural wormhole. 

 

No, it is a fully accurate statement. 

[In Exile]

I'd try to give a better argument, but whenever people get into it you just go "the series was always ridiculous" so there is no point in trying. 

 

Well, it depends on what they mean by "ridiculous". The ME series was always based in nonsense when it comes to the science. That's always been gibberish. But in ME1-ME2 the series was consistent in tone, and in fact ME2 went quite a ways to explore the themes of what it means to be a machine and alive, etc. ME3 follows up on a lot of the ME1-2 themes... until you get to the ending. And then you have the ending to Deus Ex appended onto the game. So, to me, that's the issue. There's no way to take two entirely dissimilar things - in this case being the entire series up to the ending and the ending - and produce something coherent. 

[Sion1138]

You mean... have other people get upset, right?

 

Because I'm happy with what they're doing. And I don't think going to Andromeda necessarily negates what was good about the entire trilogy. I think it will be fully present, in fact.

 

Yeah, other people.

 

In the same sense, you are referring to that which you personally found to be good about the trilogy.

[dreamgazer]

I don't get this sentence. "Bioware's idea of giving life to a completely unknown galaxy" you mean?

Are you to the point where you're picking at sentence structure? No, I meant exactly what I said: "Giving BioWare's idea of life to a completely unknown galaxy". They're going to have to decide how life developed in Andromeda from the ground up, and put their signature spin on it. Hence, BioWare's idea of life.
 

Of course it's easier, it's a blank slate.

You do realize that you have to fill an entire blank slate, right? Whereas tweaking details of an established universe is the equivalent of turning a small bush into a full tree.

[Former_Fiend]

I've given my spiel already about how I wished they would stick with the milky way, even centuries later, to show the lasting effects my decisions in the original trilogy had on galactic society. I understand the inherent difficulties of that, but I was hoping they'd rise to the challenge. 

 

Besides, we don't need to go to a new galaxy for this "space frontier" thing. Something like 90% of the Milky Way was still unexplored. 

 

But I have started to see a silver lining here. Part of the point of the original trilogy was that life evolved along the lines the Reapers had set. The cycles repeated themselves with the same basic dramas playing out again and again. Very little happened that was unpredictable.

 

Moving to Andromeda, we get to see Bioware cut loose with creativity and show us life, as they imagined it, that evolved without the restrictions of the Reapers. If that's the point, if that's the idea, then that's something to get excited about.

 

Of course, I don't have absolute faith that's where they're going with it.

[FKA_Servo]

How? How will it be fully present? I'd sincerely like to hear this. 

 

Well, if what makes it great for you personally is exploring our real-life Milky Way galaxy, then I guess it won't.

 

But for me, if it continues on with similar beautiful design (looks like Mass Effect) and world building, retains the other galactic races I've grown to love (turians, asari, krogan, etc), adds inventive new species and races (which we'd expect from a game set in the MW anyway) retains the wide open "space!" setting, and has a similarly memorable cast of characters... yeah, that'll do it for me. I can't imagine anything better.