1395 réponses à ce sujet

[Nohvarr]

Actually the real problem that people have is that have Bioware really learned form the mistakes they've made with the endings (and the trilogy for that matter), people aren't blindly going to take Bioware's word for it.

Who are these people you're referring to? You write as if your views are commonly accepted and I am not seeing that at all.

 

If Bioware ends up making the same mistakes again what are they going to do? Move to yet another galaxy or deal wi[th them? Dealing with the problems now means they'll be prepared to deal with such issue's should they the end up making them again.

The goal is not to get to that point. That will do far more good for Bioware than going back and spending time and resources fixing these endings since their solution may not conform to what you want.

 

From what was seen in the trailer, if the N7 logo was removed it could have easily be taken for a completely different IP.

Your entitled to that opinion but I disagree, the visuals, the familiar alien races, heck the weapons used by the N7 Agent all came from the Mass Effect trilogy I remember. Which is not bad for a two minute trailer that was meant to tease not inform.

[DaemionMoadrin]

There needs to be a sense of consistency and continuity, moving to another galaxy is just going to be abrupt.

 

Is that supposed to be an argument or just a desperate last hope? Continuity is exactly what we do not need or want. Consistency ... eh, I don't see why that has anything to do with the Milky Way.

 

consistency
or consistence
[kuh n-sis-tuh n-see]

 

noun, plural consistencies.
1.
a degree of density, firmness, viscosity, etc.:
The liquid has the consistency of cream.
2.
steadfast adherence to the same principles, course, form, etc.:
There is consistency in his pattern of behavior.
3.
agreement, harmony, or compatibility, especially correspondence or uniformity among the parts of a complex thing:
consistency of colors throughout the house.
4.
the condition of cohering or holding together and retaining form; solidity or firmness.

[AlanC9]

It kind of does mean exactly that.

The more time passes, the fewer and fewer players have played the original content. Fewer people know or care about it. It becomes less and less practical to build a plot off. More lore gets added that continually has to be complied with.

I don't see the length of time as necessarily a problem. I agree that fewer people will know or care about the lore, but that doesn't make the lore less usable. If anything, it makes it easier for Bio to use the lore since there will be a smaller proportion of crazed wackos around.

More lore is a problem, but that problem's not avoidable.

[BabyPuncher]

In five or ten years time, BioWare is going to have a whole mess of new problems players are going to be demanding answers to. If they're going to address this, and it would be moronic not to, the time to do it is now. The problem of having more lore is entirely avoidable by doing so as well.

[LinksOcarina]

In five or ten years time, BioWare is going to have a whole mess of new problems players are going to be demanding answers to. If they're going to address this, and it would be moronic not to, the time to do it is now. The problem of having more lore is entirely avoidable by doing so as well.

 

I doubt that very much.

 

But honestly...does it matter the reasons why at all at this point? We are not in the room or planning the game. Whatever the reason to jump to Andromeda, its very pessimistic to presume it's because they can cop-out of the ending.

 

And even if it is true, it does not reflect anything regarding the quality of the game itself. 

[Drone223]

Who are these people you're referring to? You write as if your views are commonly accepted and I am not seeing that at all.

 

Seeing as how ME3's endings caused a significant outrage, its not unreasonable to assume that there are others who are skeptical about the next game. Because so far Bioware has nothing to show that they've learned from their mistakes.

 

 

The goal is not to get to that point. That will do far more good for Bioware than going back and spending time and resources fixing these endings since their solution may not conform to what you want.

 

It doesn't matter how Bioware does it, all that matters is that Bioware deals with them instead of sidestepping them as if they never happened.

[In Exile]

Seeing as how ME3's endings caused a significant outrage, its not unreasonable to assume that there are others who are skeptical about the next game. Because so far Bioware has nothing to show that they've learned from their mistakes.

 

Bioware set this as far apart from the endings as possible short of just a hard reboot of the series. To me, that's a huge vote of confidence. Had they tried to follow up on ME3, then I would be skeptical. 

[Cyonan]

Seeing as how ME3's endings caused a significant outrage, its not unreasonable to assume that there are others who are skeptical about the next game. Because so far Bioware has nothing to show that they've learned from their mistakes.

 

It doesn't matter how Bioware does it, all that matters is that Bioware deals with them instead of sidestepping them as if they never happened.

 

Let's throw the idea of making certain choices canon out the airlock, because it's not going to happen. It's never going to happen as much as some of us might think it's the best solution.

 

How do you propose they address the issues of the ending to Mass Effect 3?

 

The issues were more than just not showing the result of our choices. The Reaper logic was broken and their entire premise demanded they be beaten by some silly last minute space magic. From 30 minutes into Mass Effect 1 the Reapers were being built up as this great unstoppable force that wiped out countless galactic civilizations.

 

Mass Effect 3 fumbled the ending to be sure, but it wasn't given a very good pass from the previous games.

 

So short of rebooting the trilogy, how do you deal with that?

[Zatche]

Seeing as how ME3's endings caused a significant outrage, its not unreasonable to assume that there are others who are skeptical about the next game. Because so far Bioware has nothing to show that they've learned from their mistakes.

It doesn't matter how Bioware does it, all that matters is that Bioware deals with them instead of sidestepping them as if they never happened.

But the outrage was because the endings were bad. Staying in the Milky Way won't change that. The only way to make the endings not bad...is to change the endings.

[AlanC9]

In five or ten years time, BioWare is going to have a whole mess of new problems players are going to be demanding answers to. If they're going to address this, and it would be moronic not to, the time to do it is now. The problem of having more lore is entirely avoidable by doing so as well.

Why is doing it now better? Sounds like you've got a fairly specific vision of what Bio ought to do, but it isn't obvious.

[AlanC9]

It doesn't matter how Bioware does it, all that matters is that Bioware deals with them instead of sidestepping them as if they never happened.

For the third time -or is it the fourth? -- exactly how are you asking Bio to "deal with" the ending here? What do you want them to do?

[RoboticWater]

Let's throw the idea of making certain choices canon out the airlock, because it's not going to happen. It's never going to happen as much as some of us might think it's the best solution.

 

How do you propose they address the issues of the ending to Mass Effect 3?

 

The issues were more than just not showing the result of our choices. The Reaper logic was broken and their entire premise demanded they be beaten by some silly last minute space magic. From 30 minutes into Mass Effect 1 the Reapers were being built up as this great unstoppable force that wiped out countless galactic civilizations.

 

Mass Effect 3 fumbled the ending to be sure, but it wasn't given a very good pass from the previous games.

 

So short of rebooting the trilogy, how do you deal with that?

If the next game started under the assumption that everyone on the Citadel died during Priority Earth, then no one would actually know what the "logic" behind the Reapers was. People could merely look at the event like some form of apocalypse and apply their own interpretation. In fact, that room for wild NPC speculation might give BioWare the ability to retroactively apply a different theme to the ending or a better motivation to the Reapers. It won't make the endings less awful, but it might allow more fans to feel justified about their headcannon without pulling the rug completely out under those who actually liked the ending.

 

Granted, an ending would likely have to be canonized to accommodate a new game and I don't see either Control or Synthesis being a very good foundation to a new series.

 

It's not a great solution, but it's all I got.

 

However, I'm fine with a soft reboot. It isn't everything I wanted, but as long as BioWare doesn't fall into the same traps, it'll be good enough. That said, I'm worried about these so-called "Remnant," I hope it's not the same story in different clothing, because that'll bring in the problems.

[AlanC9]

If the next game started under the assumption that everyone on the Citadel died during Priority Earth, then no one would actually know what the "logic" behind the Reapers was. People could merely look at the event like some form of apocalypse and apply their own interpretation. In fact, that room for wild NPC speculation might give BioWare the ability to retroactively apply a different theme to the ending or a better motivation to the Reapers. It won't make the endings less awful, but it might allow more fans to feel justified about their headcannon without pulling the rug completely out under those who actually liked the ending.
 .

I don't see how this solves anything. Even if our new PCs don't know what happened on the Citadel, we still do.

[Sartoz]

 snip

 

 

Except there is no guarantee that they won't make the same mistake again, because if they end up making the same ones again Bioware choice of running away from their mistakes is going to end up hurting them really badly.

 

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Except there is no gurantee that doing it your way they won't make the same mistake again. See what I mean?

[Nethershadow]

That's the good thing about Andromeda: It will have little impact on the game.

 

If we stayed in the MW in order to keep the impact on the game minimal, you'd have to avoid going to a lot of locations. No Migrant Fleet or Rannoch in case you destroyed the Quarians, no Geth at all in case you destroyed them, no going to Tuchanka so you don't have to show the effects of the genophage choice. You have to address synthesis ending no matter what in this scenario.

 

You would basically have to go to an unexplored cluster of space and never leave it or else risk having to show the effects of your choices in Mass Effect 1-3, which brings about an insane number of branching paths.

 

Which isn't that pretty much no different than going to Andromeda? We can bring almost everything Mass Effect with us except the locations like the Citadel or Omega and, Reaper theories aside, I'm betting we'll probably not see the Mass Relays either.

 

It's obvious that BioWare doesn't want to make an ending canon. People keep suggesting it and it would work, but it's clearly not an acceptable solution to the problem in their minds.

Good point, as I was focusing more on just the ending and moving forward from there. 

 

Though I would still rather see them just choose canon options and move forward from there. Sure some won't get the ending they chose, but as it is currently they never will anyway. This would also let those like me have the rich background of the MW and Shepards story looming in the background while all the races and their empires are there to be revisited for stories along with the new.

 

If they offer any races from the MW in the ME4 like the Krogan, I would hazard a guess that they came with us N7 Marines as it seems very unlikely any of them could have sent off a colony type deal to another galaxy and some miraculous way make the journey.

 

Oh and always wanted to ask, what is your Avatar from? Fury has always been my fave, though just wish she was a dude instead

[Sartoz]

People have invested themselves in the galaxy and what to see what its like after the war, head canon won't do it any justice.

 

Missing the point, people want to see the potential of the setting fully released, ditching it is will only result in wasted potential.

 

 Snip

 

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

I'm people too and I want the trilogy ended

 

Yes, I have invested many long hours with 1-2 and 3. The trilogy was told and now ended. I see no reason to revisit Shep's universe.

 

There is no potential, except in your mind. There is no waste.

 

The trilogy ended in a non Cinderella type way. Too bad. Shyte happens, you know!

 

As Morpheus said:

"Know what happen happend and couldn't have happend  in any other way....". So, say hello to ME:A

[Sartoz]

There needs to be a sense of consistency and continuity, moving to another galaxy is just going to be abrupt.

 

 

Dealing with the issue's now means that Bioware knows how to deal with the same ones in the future should they make them again. Running away from them just means that they'll have no idea how to address them since they never bothered addressing the ones they made with the trilogy.

 

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

The ARKCON colony ships and the Pathfinders exist as a contingency plan for humanity's survival, possibly the Krogans and Solarians, against the Reapers' intent to destroy all organics in the MW galaxy. Their goal it to set foot in Andromeda, colonize a world and grow from there.

 

As such, in Andromeda what need is there for consistency or continuity? This is their story now. The story of the ARKCON and the Pathfinders. 

[Nethershadow]

Let's throw the idea of making certain choices canon out the airlock, because it's not going to happen. It's never going to happen as much as some of us might think it's the best solution.

 

How do you propose they address the issues of the ending to Mass Effect 3?

 

The issues were more than just not showing the result of our choices. The Reaper logic was broken and their entire premise demanded they be beaten by some silly last minute space magic. From 30 minutes into Mass Effect 1 the Reapers were being built up as this great unstoppable force that wiped out countless galactic civilizations.

 

Mass Effect 3 fumbled the ending to be sure, but it wasn't given a very good pass from the previous games.

 

So short of rebooting the trilogy, how do you deal with that?

This thread is more now about what people liked and didn't like and why they are giving the next installment a hard time. 

 

So based on what your asking, there is no answer, no matter how amazing it would be will change or sway Bioware to change the game when they already have written that part in.

 

The only things now that are being discussed now are the semantics of what anyone would preferably want to see and why. The only time the fans had to really encourage this aspect was before they even announced the game, because then nothing would be set in stone at that point.

 

 

And for anyone above that truly thinks without statistics to prove that the majority of the fan base was pissed with the ending of the trilogy and loss of faith in ME franchise, has to be delusional. I don't think I've seen any game get such publicity and all of it negative.

[MrFob]

The only time the fans had to really encourage this aspect was before they even announced the game, because then nothing would be set in stone at that point.

 

 

Oh, don't worry, I distinctly remember that happening on these boards at the time ... extensively.

[Nethershadow]

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

I'm people too and I want the trilogy ended

 

Yes, I have invested many long hours with 1-2 and 3. The trilogy was told and now ended. I see no reason to revisit Shep's universe.

 

There is no potential, except in your mind. There is no waste.

 

The trilogy ended in a non Cinderella type way. Too bad. Shyte happens, you know!

 

As Morpheus said:

"Know what happen happend and couldn't have happend  in any other way....". So, say hello to ME:A

But you are revisiting Sheps universe, as Andromeda is part of that universe.

[Cyonan]

Good point, as I was focusing more on just the ending and moving forward from there. 

 

Though I would still rather see them just choose canon options and move forward from there. Sure some won't get the ending they chose, but as it is currently they never will anyway. This would also let those like me have the rich background of the MW and Shepards story looming in the background while all the races and their empires are there to be revisited for stories along with the new.

 

If they offer any races from the MW in the ME4 like the Krogan, I would hazard a guess that they came with us N7 Marines as it seems very unlikely any of them could have sent off a colony type deal to another galaxy and some miraculous way make the journey.

 

Oh and always wanted to ask, what is your Avatar from? Fury has always been my fave, though just wish she was a dude instead

 

To be honest if for some insane reason BioWare left the choice up to me, I'd probably go with making one set of choices canon and make a new story in the MW, although at this point we're stuck with Andromeda.

 

For ME:A I'm betting that we leave before any of the major choices so that they don't have to address the idea that all the Geth might have been destroyed or something like that.

 

My avatar is actually fan art of Kasumi =P

[Valkyrja]

By sidestepping the problem they are in fact pretending it never happened, they don't want to face the problems they've created and its going to hurt them in the long run.

 

The hurdle here is in the short run with making Andromeda a success. If it is that means that enough fans, new and old, bought into the game's premise and weren't bothered by moving on from the Milky Way.

 

At that point the "long run" will involve making sequels to a well-received game and letting 2012 issues stay in the past.

[Drone223]

Bioware set this as far apart from the endings as possible short of just a hard reboot of the series. To me, that's a huge vote of confidence. Had they tried to follow up on ME3, then I would be skeptical. 

Except by running away from the issues Bioware has learned nothing from them and if Bioware ends up making the same mistakes again how exactly are they going to deal with them?

 

But the outrage was because the endings were bad. Staying in the Milky Way won't change that. The only way to make the endings not bad...is to change the endings.

The problem with leaving is that a lot of the established lore will be gone forever Bioware may as well start a new IP instead.

 

For the third time -or is it the fourth? -- exactly how are you asking Bio to "deal with" the ending here? What do you want them to do?

Look at some of my previous posts.

 

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

Except there is no gurantee that doing it your way they won't make the same mistake again. See what I mean?

I don't care how they do it be it canonizing and ending or something else, they should just deal with the endings now so they are prepared to deal with similar issue's if they end up making them again.

 

                                                                           <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

The ARKCON colony ships and the Pathfinders exist as a contingency plan for humanity's survival, possibly the Krogans and Solarians, against the Reapers' intent to destroy all organics in the MW galaxy. Their goal it to set foot in Andromeda, colonize a world and grow from there.

 

As such, in Andromeda what need is there for consistency or continuity? This is their story now. The story of the ARKCON and the Pathfinders. 

No matter how much Bioware tries to come up with an in game reason for setting the game in another galaxy, every one knows the reason they're doing it is because they refuse to address the issue's of the trilogy they've made.

[dreamgazer]

There isn't a scenario where BioWare wouldn't be seen as side-stepping the trilogy's issues and variables, whether it's moving to another galaxy, canonizing an ending, or jumping ahead far in the future.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

There isn't a scenario where BioWare wouldn't be seen as side-stepping the trilogy's issues and variables, whether it's moving to another galaxy, canonizing an ending, or jumping ahead far in the future.

And unfortunately, they chose the worst of those three options.