Yes it can, but how much of it will be? They had a poll out about which races people wanted to continue forward, implying that it's possible some won't.
Apart from the major Council races (salarians, turians, asari), humans and krogans, the setting basically just has joke races, in the sense of just being space punch-lines (e.g. the Hanar, Elcor and Volus), new fodder races in ME2 (e.g. the vorcha and batarians) or, basically, the drell.
My guess is we'll just get the ME1 races, sans batarians.
Yes it can, but how much of it will be? They had a poll out about which races people wanted to continue forward, implying that it's possible some won't.
It didn't just imply.
With how the person described it, Bioware pretty much flat out asked "If there are two races the fans don't want to come back, which would they be?".
This is revisionist history.
Amalur was made by two studios and EA only published the game. Big Huge Games and 38 Studios collaborated together on that one.
38 Studios, which was owned by Curt Schilling of all people shut down not because of EA, but because they couldn't pay off their debts in the state of Rhode Island, not to mention they made a massive move to Rhode Island during development of Amalur. One other thing, the studio shut down primarily due to mismanagement by Schilling, see, Amalur actually did well for itself as a new IP, 1.2 million is pretty good.
Problem is it needed 3 million to break even, and Schilling basically bet the farm on Amalur and a MMO to do that for them.
Pandemic was also in deep trouble, much like BioWare, when they were purchased together. Problem is Pandemic did Mercenaries 2 and LOTR: Conquest, two good games, but not great games, which under performed heavily. The Sabeoteur would be their final game after the studio was closing, and that too was a game that was good, but underperforming. As a company, I don't blame EA for shutting them down. BioWare, for it's part, has had five successful games under EA's leadership, at least in terms of sales figures, maybe not fan reception.
Also, considering BioWare as an entity has more or less become a major sub-division of EA, they are in no immediate danger of being shut down. Look at Maxis, they closed one studio but they still have the Maxis branch, or the fact that one BioWare studio was let go already, Victory games. The name, the brand, is not going anywhere at this point, and shutting down studios is more or less part and parcel with the industry as a whole;
People are overly panicking because of stuff that happened a decade ago, which is not even all of EA's fault.
I do have to remind folks that Westwood studios had most of it's staff walk out on EA right after they purchased the studio, while they were in the middle of development of Tiberian Sun. It was after that EA put tighter controls onto the company, but that was during the Larry Probst years, when the whole work for 20 hours a day, 6 days a week thing was too common. Now only Rockstar does that, (and gets away with it because...reasons), but honestly...Westwood dug it's own grave in that situation.
So these accusations are not only incomplete or inaccurate, but a fallacy by not looking at the big picture.
Explained a Lot better than me! 
I never was good at words 
Few people have complained about Shepard and Co not coming back. How about you read what people say before you start mocking them?
Basically only some of the known species remain, likely even mass relay system will be gone, id say its a totally new IP. I mean even the name Mass Effect is from the way the species travelled between star clusters in the Milky Way. They have to escape the ending, thats good. New characters are needed, thats good. If you accept that only the "shooting from cover" and the N7 seven logo will be the only thing reminding you that you are playing ME then the only concern is how they manage not to **** up the story of getting to Andromeda. And you dont dont **** about that story yet. Well there is something:
Apart from the major Council races (salarians, turians, asari), humans and krogans, the setting basically just has joke races, in the sense of just being space punch-lines (e.g. the Hanar, Elcor and Volus), new fodder races in ME2 (e.g. the vorcha and batarians) or, basically, the drell.
My guess is we'll just get the ME1 races, sans batarians.
This is my hope. In the first game, the Batarians were just "out there" until Bring Down the Sky. The Vorcha never got any characterization and we didn't meet or even see enough Drell for me to care.
It didn't just imply.
With how the person described it, Bioware pretty much flat out asked "If there are two races the fans don't want to come back, which would they be?".
Now that you mention it, something about "two" does sound familiar. There's no answer that won't tick off a large group of fans.
Why are people so keen to dismiss MEA so early on? It it because of DAI(a completely different kind of game), or are they still sore over an ending to a game that came out 3 years ago. It just doesn't make sense. People should just grow up, let go of past slights & give this brand new game in a much beloved franchise a break.
Those people that are screaming bloody murder right now are likely going to be the ones buying it right after the game's release. I know it is weird, but when you love something so deeply, you are also terrified of being disappointed by it.
.....But the series DID follow different ships and crew but set in the same universe....multiple times really. You had TOS, TNG, Deep Space 9, Voyager, and Enterprise. All occurring across a wide range of timelines, and in different parts of the universe. They are all still considered part of the Star Trek series.
If you're trying to PROVE his point, you're doing a good job. None of the "spin offs" of Star Trek even came close to matching the numbers TNG had. Notice how they're all still within OUR Galaxy anyway? So yah...you're only strengthening his case.
I think so. There is little focus on technology. The main focus is The Force, which is more mystical and spiritual. The article does refer to Space Opera as science fiction but the definition with which it puts Star Wars in there is "adventure stories set in space", which is exactly what I was saying.
I think so. There is little focus on technology. The main focus is The Force, which is more mystical and spiritual. The article does refer to Space Opera as science fiction but the definition with which it puts Star Wars in there is "adventure stories set in space", which is exactly what I was saying.
Well, it was mystical and spiritual. Then it just turned out to be a positive side effect of having enough Midi-chlorians living inside you. Unless you headcanon that Qui-Gon was just trolling Anakin. 
Well, it was mystical and spiritual. Then it just turned out to be a positive side effect of having enough Midi-chlorians living inside you. Unless you headcanon that Qui-Gon was just trolling Anakin.
Good point. Does that turn it into sci-fi then?
Note how that never came up ever again, not even in the other two prequels.
There won't be a non-ridiculous way to get to Andromeda, but this is a series based on ridiculous gibberish theories of science.
But I only want plausible ridiculous gibberish, like the Mass Effect, to explain how we get to Andromeda. Not Crucible levels of stupidity with extra space magic. Has that now become too much to ask for in the ME universe ?
More precisely, they always looked like ridiculous contrivances for those who thought about them.
I agree, but my suspension of disbelief and general not thinking too hard about stuff took care of most of them. But the Catalyst and it's logic showing up in the final minutes were like a wakeup slap in the face. Considering I'd already had to deal with quite alot of nonsense by that point already, that was just too much even for me to take. The end result was me thinking about the plot, which is never a good sign when I should have just been enjoying the game. So here I am with the entire ME trilogy looking to me like unbelievable ridiculous nonsense (I edited out the expletives).
Don't you have to actually hear the gibberish before deciding how plausible it is?
All gibberish is relative. It's the law of gibberish.
I have to see the gibberish in context with all the other gibberish to decide how plausible the gibberish is.
I think so. There is little focus on technology. The main focus is The Force, which is more mystical and spiritual. The article does refer to Space Opera as science fiction but the definition with which it puts Star Wars in there is "adventure stories set in space", which is exactly what I was saying.
But that embodies what Star Wars is. Focusing on Technology does not make something science fiction or even space opera. Some of the literary tropes found in Star Wars by using a sci-fi setting is what makes it all more palpable.
Think of it this way, the plot is a heroes journey, the setting is a sci-fi one. The force is a mystical power yes (with midi-chlorians and all that but whatever) but surrounding the world is technology in the background, inter-personal relationships and politics, war and conflict, and the use of technology and the force to achieve such goals. We see old themes made new in Star Wars because of the sci-fi setting, killing a dragon, facing your greatest fears, a wild chase and betrayal of friends and foes alike.
The personal connection is what makes it a Space Opera; the serialized format, the character relationships, all of that is what gives it weight in the end. In many ways, Mass Effect is very similar to Star Wars with these themes...which may be a point of contention for some but, once again...I got to say what did people expect in the end?
There won't be a non-ridiculous way to get to Andromeda, but this is a series based on ridiculous gibberish theories of science.
How about something that's at least consistent with established gibberish?
All gibberish is relative. It's the law of gibberish.
I have to see the gibberish in context with all the other gibberish to decide how plausible the gibberish is.
Right. So it's premature to assign the value.
You can still assign a level of preferred gibberish. My preference is "The Mass Effect Level" of gibberish, rather than "The Crucible Level" of gibberish.
I think we need to start assigning some quantifiable values to gibberish, otherwise we may end up just talking gibberish.
But I only want plausible ridiculous gibberish, like the Mass Effect, to explain how we get to Andromeda. Not Crucible levels of stupidity with extra space magic. Has that now become too much to ask for in the ME universe ?
But the only reason people say this is an unfamiliarity with the science ME1, for example, took a dump all over. Quarian immunology is pure garbage. Everything they say about AI is nonsense. The very idea of a "mass effect" driven by neutrons is actually laughable. In fact, almost everything related to biology is a joke.
None of it is even remotely plausible unless you're unfamiliar enough with the subject matter. Which isn't a knock on the fanbase, because people shouldn't have to have degrees in all of science ™ to play a sci-fi game.
It's just that ME isn't good at this stuff. It never was good at it.
How about something that's at least consistent with established gibberish?
That's not really possible, by definition. You can't expand nonsese in a logically consistent way. It wouldn't be nonsense if it could be treated in a logical consistent way.
You can still assign a level of preferred gibberish. My preference is "The Mass Effect Level" of gibberish, rather than "The Crucible Level" of gibberish.
I think we need to start assigning some quantifiable values to gibberish, otherwise we may end up just talking gibberish.
Biotics are just straight up force powers. That's about as much fantasy level gibberish as you can get into sci-fi before someone's just a straight up wizard casting spells. The Asari read alien minds. That's pure magic.
The ME3 ending was dumb, but it wasn't any dumber because of the science it used. The fail is all about theme and plot, not made up space nonsense.
But the only reason people say this is an unfamiliarity with the science ME1, for example, took a dump all over. Quarian immunology is pure garbage. Everything they say about AI is nonsense. The very idea of a "mass effect" driven by neutrons is actually laughable. In fact, almost everything related to biology is a joke.
None of it is even remotely plausible unless you're unfamiliar enough with the subject matter. Which isn't a knock on the fanbase, because people shouldn't have to have degrees in all of science ™ to play a sci-fi game.
It's just that ME isn't good at this stuff. It never was good at it.
That's not really possible, by definition. You can't expand nonsese in a logically consistent way. It wouldn't be nonsense if it could be treated in a logical consistent way.
Biotics are just straight up force powers. That's about as much fantasy level gibberish as you can get into sci-fi before someone's just a straight up wizard casting spells. The Asari read alien minds. That's pure magic.
The ME3 ending was dumb, but it wasn't any dumber because of the science it used. The fail is all about theme and plot, not made up space nonsense.
I guess it's about how much nonsense your suspension of disbelief can take before your conscious mind starts to question it. Once that happens any illusion of reality, that the fiction has created, will fail. Sci Fi gibberish has to be as consisent as Fantasy gibberish otherwise it's not believable within established lore.
Biotics/Embrace Eternity etc have a partial explanation within ME's narrative. It doesn't need to be water tight for a player to swallow it, just believable enough for them not to question it. I don't think that can be said for ME3's ending.
I agree the fail, as you put it, is about theme and plot. But the ending's space magic makes you question all the space magic within the trilogy, which doesn't help the plot's believability either.
I guess it's about how much nonsense your suspension of disbelief can take before your conscious mind starts to question it. Once that happens any illusion of reality, that the fiction has created, will fail. Sci Fi gibberish has to be as consisent as Fantasy gibberish otherwise it's not believable within established lore.
Biotics/Embrace Eternity etc have a partial explanation within ME's narrative. It doesn't need to be water tight for a player to swallow it, just believable enough for a player not to question it. I don't think that can be said for ME3's ending.
I agree the fail, as you put it, is about theme and plot. But the ending's space magic makes you question all the space magic within the trilogy, which doesn't help the plot's believability either.
Wait, there's an explanation for the magic asari mind reading powers? Because I don't remember it. And let's not even forget the part on Noveria where Bioware forgets they're not writing Star Wars, and they talk about rachni being "sensitive to biotics".
I don't think ME3s ending - in isolation, i.e., ignoring everything else apart from that ending Catalyst sequence - is more nonsensical. It's a huge tone shift and introduces a bunch of stuff right out of nowhere. But stuff like making organic-synthetic hybrids using the powers of lasers isn't that out of left field for sci-fi.
LOL, well written? Don't make me laugh, you can't even tell how they even work to consider them as not space magicky.
What keeps your heart beating? How does that work? Why doesn't it just stop for a day and take a break? Magic. Can you tell exactly how the SR2 drive core operates or why there's even a need for human engineers with an EDI and 'quantum-entanglement' communication systems? What is the source of fuel for the USS Enterprise? Is the galactic economic system legitimately able to support large space craft's fuel needs? Magic. It's a ****** story, not a PHD Doctorate subject.
What keeps your heart beating? How does that work? Why doesn't it just stop for a day and take a break? Magic. Can you tell exactly how the SR2 drive core operates or why there's even a need for human engineers with an EDI and 'quantum-entanglement' communication systems? What is the source of fuel for the USS Enterprise? Is the galactic economic system legitimately able to support large space craft's fuel needs? Magic. It's a ****** story, not a PHD Doctorate subject.
Did you just call hearts magic? Because... umm... they're not. Or is this a brilliant stealth troll post?
Retour en haut