I would think at some Point close to the Reaper Attack on the Citadel in ME3, maybe in response to that incoming Attack, carrying over most of the Choices except the Ending.
Yeah anytime between the Cerberus attack on the Citadel and the final mission was when it was given the go ahead to leave
The idea that the ark leaves after ME3 is even more stupid than the ME3 ending, and I need only one reason to know this, though many other good reasons have been provided.
ME:A is Bioware running away very quickly from the ME trilogy debacle, and the only way to do that is to completely bypass the endings. How do you do that? Leave before the endings.
On top of that, if it's after ME3, there is absolutely no motivation to go to Andromeda. The only reason to escape to Andromeda is to flee impending doom, just in case. The only argument against this second point is if they aren't leaving for Andromeda, but they hit some wormhole and OOPS ANDROMEDA. Again, this is even more stupid than the ME3 ending.
OK, there is a second reason why they would leave for Andromeda after ME3. They are going with a super Reaper-killer weapon, to make sure there are no Reapers there, and if there are, wipe them out. So if you think either of these two reasons for an Andromeda escapade are likely, then your hopes for a post ME3 ending adventure to Andromeda are alive...assuming you ignore the whole point of the writers setting things up in Andromeda to begin with: to escape the ME3 endings.
On top of that, if it's after ME3, there is absolutely no motivation to go to Andromeda. The only reason to escape to Andromeda is to flee impending doom, just in case.
Human history is full of people who have done things for reasons like exploration or to prove it can be done. Why would this be any different?
I think this is more of a Goldrush.
Human history is full of people who have done things for reasons like exploration or to prove it can be done. Why would this be any different?
Because
1: The Milky Way is only about 10% explored or less
2: Post ME:3 everything is a mess, and populations have been significantly reduced, planets and systems wrecked, and the main concern is not "hey, let's go try to make some ship to check out Andromeda galaxy just cause!" That's as stupid as the ME3 endings. Besides, the purpose of exploration is either to settle new land in an attempt to escape political controls (plenty of unexplored space and planets available in the Milky Way) or to beat someone else to the punch (ostensibly for political reasons, such as claiming new land first, new colonies first, etc.).
3: A bunch of other reasons already provided.
When Milky Way characters just can't take the cheating anymore.
Because
1: The Milky Way is only about 10% explored or less
2: Post ME:3 everything is a mess, and populations have been significantly reduced, planets and systems wrecked, and the main concern is not "hey, let's go try to make some ship to check out Andromeda galaxy just cause!" That's as stupid as the ME3 endings. Besides, the purpose of exploration is either to settle new land in an attempt to escape political controls (plenty of unexplored space and planets available in the Milky Way) or to beat someone else to the punch (ostensibly for political reasons, such as claiming new land first, new colonies first, etc.).
3: A bunch of other reasons already provided.
1) Less than 1% actually, but Bioware has answered that they feel like they made the galaxy feel too small so want to start on a smaller(but still massive) scale, hence Andromeda.
2) You just gave another reason why it is logical to go to Andromeda. The Milky Way has been ravaged by the Reapers. We know from Vigil and planetary entries that they make the planets they attack unable to sustain life for vast lengths of time. Andromeda offers the possibility of a galaxy untouched by them, and thus full of resources. After all, isn't that one of the main reasons why the Ark Theory supporters are supporting it? The only difference is the ship leaves after, not during, the Reaper War.
3) All of which have had counterarguments.
I think this is more of a Goldrush.
Well, they do seem intent to give the game a Space Western feel to it.
1) Less than 1% actually, but Bioware has answered that they feel like they made the galaxy feel too small so want to start on a smaller(but still massive) scale, hence Andromeda.
2) You just gave another reason why it is logical to go to Andromeda. The Milky Way has been ravaged by the Reapers. We know from Vigil and planetary entries that they make the planets they attack unable to sustain life for vast lengths of time. Andromeda offers the possibility of a galaxy untouched by them, and thus full of resources. After all, isn't that one of the main reasons why the Ark Theory supporters are supporting it? The only difference is the ship leaves after, not during, the Reaper War.
3) All of which have had counterarguments.
1: Then you support my point. They made the galaxy seem too small, but then they wiped out the mass relays, so problem solved.
2: No. Because of the damage, it makes no sense to use the limited resources to jump into the complete unknown. It would be a stupid waste of needed materials and personnel.
3: Those counterarguments all failed to answer the one problem you seem to ignore: that the whole point of ME:A is to avoid dealing with the endings.
Edit: Look, I know that for whatever reason(s) you want it to happen after ME3, but that's just not likely. The only compelling motivation to leave for an entirely new galaxy given the ME trilogy context is if you think the one you are in is doomed.
Andromeda? Ah, yes, Andromeda. I once knew a girl who lived on Andromeda. Long time ago, when I was a young man. Not a day passes I don't think her and the promise that I made which I will always keep. That one perfect day on Andromeda. That's uh, five blocks up, two over.
1: Then you support my point. They made the galaxy seem too small, but then they wiped out the mass relays, so problem solved.
2: No. Because of the damage, it makes no sense to use the limited resources to jump into the complete unknown. It would be a stupid waste of needed materials and personnel.
3: Those counterarguments all failed to answer the one problem you seem to ignore: that the whole point of ME:A is to avoid dealing with the endings.
1) If that point was "We should stay in the Milky Way", then absolutely. If that point was "They should leave during the Reaper War", then absolutely not.
2) Not as stupid a waste of needed materials and resources as jumping to a complete unknown during a war where you need every resource you can get to fight back.
3) Bioware has yet to state that as the reason why we are going to Andromeda, so it being "the whole point" is nothing but a fan theory at this point.
Well, they do seem intent to give the game a Space Western feel to it.
Well Yeehaw.
1) If that point was "We should stay in the Milky Way", then absolutely. If that point was "They should leave during the Reaper War", then absolutely not.
2) Not as stupid a waste of needed materials and resources as jumping to a complete unknown during a war where you need every resource you can get to fight back.
3) Bioware has yet to state that as the reason why we are going to Andromeda, so it being "the whole point" is nothing but a fan theory at this point.
1: This doesn't address anything.
2: Wrong again. If you think you are doomed, and your best chance for survival is to flee, then using resources to flee is not a waste, but the only smart choice.
3: Yes they have. They were at some convention, and were fielding questions from audience members. One question was about the writing, what had they had learned from the response to the ME:3 endings, and so on. Now they did not want to use spoilers, and they also do not want to besmirch the writers, or head writer for ME3, but what they said was about them learning from their mistakes, etc. Take that answer, and add it to their frequent statements about not creating a canon ending (your choices matter blah blah), then add that to the many failures to follow up on various choices you make throughout the game, and what do you get? The choice to avoid dealing with choices altogether by bypassing them altogether. It is the only thing that makes sense.
All of your arguments are nothing more than "I want this really really badly." But if you look at it objectively, given the context, and all that we know, all that has been implied, it seems very unlikely that exodus to Andromeda takes place after ME3. Now, it could, because the writers can write whatever they want, but it would be amazingly stupid.
The idea that the ark leaves after ME3 is even more stupid than the ME3 ending, and I need only one reason to know this, though many other good reasons have been provided.
ME:A is Bioware running away very quickly from the ME trilogy debacle, and the only way to do that is to completely bypass the endings. How do you do that? Leave before the endings.
Or leave after - a while after, mind you - and suddenly the time, and distance that the move to Andromeda provides, allows Bioware to handle the endings without them permeating every last aspect of the game.
Bioware likes continuity. They like respecting your choices - at least as far as their resources enable them to. If they didn't, we wouldn't have had the thousands of little touches that personalised ME3 to your trilogy playthrough. So I can't believe that they'd sweep under the carpet the one choice with the largest set of consequences.
Yes, they're putting some distance between ME:A and the ME3 endings. But that doesn't mean they're bypassing them entirely.
And I'd appreciate it if you didn't call me stupid for liking the idea that they're not, thank-you.
On top of that, if it's after ME3, there is absolutely no motivation to go to Andromeda. The only reason to escape to Andromeda is to flee impending doom, just in case. The only argument against this second point is if they aren't leaving for Andromeda, but they hit some wormhole and OOPS ANDROMEDA. Again, this is even more stupid than the ME3 ending.
I can provide an easy motivation - they found a shortcut. A relay, not built by the Reapers, travelling to Andromeda. If the Council found a relay travelling that far, you can bet that they'd want to know what's on the other side, who built it, and why. Especially with the lessons learned regarding the Citadel trap. And an exploration mission could quickly develop into a colonisation mission when they found free space on the far side.
Heck, an Andromeda relay is probably the second most popular fan-method of getting to Andromeda, behind the super-FTL Ark Ship. I'm just arguing that such a relay provides a motivation for going to Andromeda regardless of when it is found.
Retour en haut