124 réponses à ce sujet

[Panda]

I would call it spin-off as well. It can be sequel, but that would depend on how much it does address ME3.. if it ignores it completely then spin-off for sure.

[The Arbiter]

I've been going over this in my head since I finished ME:1-3 a couple months ago, and following the news about ME:A.

 

No Shepherd, so his/her story is done?

No original series characters

New Galaxy, with new planets

New aliens and enemies and I'm assuming a new overall big bad

 

So my big question is, what exactly is it about Andromeda that makes this Mass Effect?  It seems like many of the defining features and characters of the franchise are being done away with and we're starting over from scratch due to the dissapointments of the ME:3 endings.

 

The only things I've seen so far that have been confirmed that make Andromeda "Mass Effect" are

1. Takes place in the same universe, with more or less the same technology (Mass Effect drives/Element Zero)

2. Supposedly a couple representatives of the races we already know (I think an Asari companion was revealed?)

3. Similar gameplay mechanics as ME:3

4.......Aaannnd I can't really think of anything else.

 

I'm just having trouble wrapping my head around this new game really being a "Mass Effect" game.  Don't get me wrong, it sounds like its going to be a very fun and intriguing game.  It just doesn't shake my lingering feelings of sadness that the original series I grew to love is completely dead and done with, to the point the entire thing has to be rebooted/restarted/removed to an entirely new setting with only the smallest of connections to the original games.

 

Does anyone else feel the same way?

 

Or am I missing seeing something important here?

It's not a reboot more like of a FRESH RESTART of the franchise while not acknowledging it as a restart despite the contrary.

 

I have been making these Alternate Universe/Reboot/Restart theories like crazy for the past 5 months already.

 

And yes some fans did call it as a quote: cowardly act for not facing their mistakes and fixing or making one ending atleast canon. Yes fans would be angry about canon because they want the ultimate desicion crazy crap for themselves but where did that crap got us now? THE DEATH OF THE MILKYWAY We can take shepard and company dying but the whole entire galaxy erased because of RGB? 

 

Now Bioware defenders would argue that Mass Effect is not just "about milkyway, shepard, and company" ! then I WOULD PERSONALLY ASK THEM WHAT MAKES MASS EFFECT MASS EFFECT? is it the sci-fi theme? romance? combat? exploration? shiet there are tons of other alternatives out there! whether they admit it or not, Shepard and friends DID MAKE AN IMPACT WITH THE MASS EFFECT SERIES they are just being hypocrites. Every character they made contributed something to the franchise and they are all assets which will be thrown under the rug now due to RGB and all for the sake of artistic integrity BS. We could have gotten both old and new characters but nope. It's like saying Cloud Strife is not important in Final Fantasy or Gordon Freeman is worthless in Half Life or Master Chief is just a support character in the Halo universe. Am I looking forward to Andromeda? yes but I am still debating whether I should buy it or not

[The Arbiter]

Andromeda is basically The Next Generation for Mass Effect.

 

It's still obviously going to have biotics and tech users and many of the species from the first trilogy, it's just going to be its own story.

 

Mass Effect is more than just Shep and friends.

with all do respect... if Andromeda Fails... if it ever fails and breaks the Mass Effect franchise forever. you'll be re-thinking those words

[BioWareM0d13]

BW's been very insistent that ME:A has nothing to do with the trilogy. It's not a sequel, prequel or sidequel. It is its own story. ST:NG was a continuation of Kirk's universe and the show referenced past events from TOS quite often. ME:A, I feel, will have a much stronger disconnect and will be to the trilogy what Jedi Academy is to KOTOR. They're set in the same universe and use similar technology, but that's about it. That doesn't mean it's going to be bad. In fact it could be quite good. We'll just have to wait and see. Reboot, spinoff, ME:NG, call it what you will, I don't think it matters. It's a clean slate w/ a new story.

 

Star Trek: Voyager would probably be a better comparison for Andromeda than TNG.

[Andrew Lucas]

BW's been very insistent that ME:A has nothing to do with the trilogy. It's not a sequel, prequel or sidequel. It is its own story. ST:NG was a continuation of Kirk's universe and the show referenced past events from TOS quite often. ME:A, I feel, will have a much stronger disconnect and will be to the trilogy what Jedi Academy is to KOTOR. They're set in the same universe and use similar technology, but that's about it. That doesn't mean it's going to be bad. In fact it could be quite good. We'll just have to wait and see. Reboot, spinoff, ME:NG, call it what you will, I don't think it matters. It's a clean slate w/ a new story.

Andromeda takes place a very long time after the original trilogy, as confirmed, it's technically a sequel.

[The Arbiter]

Andromeda takes place a very long time after the original trilogy, as confirmed, it's technically a sequel.

no it hasn't. BioWare stated it's neither a Sequel nor a Prequel. 

[RoboticWater]

with all do respect... if Andromeda Fails... if it ever fails and breaks the Mass Effect franchise forever. you'll be re-thinking those words

Why would (s)he? Even if Andromeda is completely irredeemable (that's a big if), then that changes nothing about it's technical classification. Quality doesn't affect taxonomy.
 

Now Bioware defenders would argue that Mass Effect is not just "about milkyway, shepard, and company" ! then I WOULD PERSONALLY ASK THEM WHAT MAKES MASS EFFECT MASS EFFECT? is it the sci-fi theme? romance? combat? exploration? shiet there are tons of other alternatives out there! whether they admit it or not, Shepard and friends DID MAKE AN IMPACT WITH THE MASS EFFECT SERIES they are just being hypocrites. Every character they made contributed something to the franchise and they are all assets which will be thrown under the rug now due to RGB and all for the sake of artistic integrity BS.

Despite what you may think, one can care about Shepard and friends and fully support a new galaxy. That's not hypocrisy, that's just moving on. I, for one, believe that the Mass Effect universe is good enough to house more than one story and more than one hero.
 

We could have gotten both old and new characters but nope. It's like saying Cloud Strife is not important in Final Fantasy or Gordon Freeman is worthless in Half Life or Master Chief is just a support character in the Halo universe. Am I looking forward to Andromeda? yes but I am still debating whether I should buy it or not

In fact, Gordon Freeman and Master Chief are replaceable characters within their own universe. Outside the narrative arcs of those characters, the universe can focus on any given person and setting so long as its story makes sense within it.

[SpaceLobster]

http://blog.bioware....ffect-andromeda

I may have misread it, but I didn't see anything saying it is a sequel/prequel/Goddes-knows-what.

[The Arbiter]

Why would (s)he? Even if Andromeda is completely irredeemable (that's a big if), then that changes nothing about it's technical classification. Quality doesn't affect taxonomy.
 

Despite what you may think, one can care about Shepard and friends and fully support a new galaxy. That's not hypocrisy, that's just moving on. I, for one, believe that the Mass Effect universe is good enough to house more than one story and more than one hero.
 

In fact, Gordon Freeman and Master Chief are replaceable characters within their own universe. Outside the narrative arcs of those characters, the universe can focus on any given person and setting so long as its story makes sense within it.

Moving on... hahahaha now there's something. Chief and Freeman are replacable? lmao I would love to see the sh!tstorm it would generate 

[SpaceLobster]

Chief and Freeman are replacable?

In theory, yes.

[The Arbiter]

In theory, yes.

They did it a couple of times but permanently? I don't think the game would remain or even sell the same without these icons. 

 

I do remember opposing force and blueshift but it did not feel the same as the crowbar maniac holding - scientist whacking things which is a selling point and which is also responsible for making HL as HL. Replace freeman with another whacking mute guy? still not the same guy with eyeglasses would still be referred to as freeman 2.0

[Andrew Lucas]

I may have misread it, but I didn't see anything saying it is a sequel/prequel/Goddes-knows-what.

It's because the game doesn't exist, it's a vacuum since you can't understand the very specific line I've quoted. It's a lie, there's no Andromeda.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

"Before we wrapped up the original trilogy with The Citadel DLC, we sat down and had the 'how do we get out of this mess?' conversation. Then one of our developers noted that the Asari Councilor mentioned that 'Plans for continuity of civilization have to be considered. I never thought this day would come.'

 

"Ah ha! We had it. Since we wrote in The Citadel DLC that The Council already took the reaper threat seriously and had it in the archives, but was shining on Shepard because he was with Cerberus at the time in ME2, we could  use this line as a basis for a secret project that had been underway since the end of ME1: an ark to save the remnants of galactic civilization in the event that the reapers  did invade.

 

"This solved a multitude of problems. It preserved player choice within the Original Trilogy, and it got us out of having to set numerous canons in order to get out of the mess created by that ending that would have yielded an absolutely horrid game in the Milky Way."

 

Uh, come on, you know we can't write that stuff. Rewrite it, and make it sound like it was our plan to go to Andromeda all along - The Management

[RoboticWater]

Moving on... hahahaha now there's something. Chief and Freeman are replacable? lmao I would love to see the sh!tstorm it would generate 

Halo Reach/ODST/Wars exists and so does Blue Shift. I'm not saying the community wouldn't freak out, but these games did sell.

 

At most, the removal of these characters would hurt the marketing force of their game, but that's it. If the story's still good, then removing a character won't make the game any worse

 

They did it a couple of times but permanently? I don't think the game would remain or even sell the same without these icons. 

 

I do remember opposing force and blueshift but it did not feel the same as the crowbar maniac holding - scientist whacking things which is a selling point and which is also responsible for making HL as HL. Replace freeman with another whacking mute guy? still not the same guy with eyeglasses would still be referred to as freeman 2.0

It's really your own fault if playing literally same character with the same mechanics and a different name makes the game less fun.

[SpaceLobster]

It's because the game doesn't exist, it's a vacuum since you can't understand the very specific line I've quoted. It's a lie, there's no Andromeda.

Then your reply confirms what he says.

[SpaceLobster]

"a long time AFTER the original trilogy"

That's not what the blog says, it comes down to the same thing, but it still is not what the blog says.

[AlleyD]

I base my perspective on my career experience in brand equity and identity management. I got into the franchise not as a gamer but for professional reasons;  to analyze the brand equity crisis' that played out in 2012-2013, and to observe the impact social media has during a brand equity crisis. The ME3 consumer reception and performance of the BioWare brand in the period between 2010 and Y/E 2013 was, for me, one of the greatest brand equity failures in the 21st century games industry to date.

 

That isn't a disgruntled fan unhappy with the ending etc, it's an observation informed by a systematic analysis of a brand's equity and identity perceptions across a large number of consumers, and across an extended time frame.

 

For me ME:A is a comprehensive franchise regeneration exercise or "total reboot", but I do not think that you will hear many BioWare marketeers use that language to describe ME:A. (Most marketeers avoid the terminology of "reboot" or will attempt to confuse the definition as much as possible). Possibly the major motive for avoiding the term reboot is that most definitions suggest a response to the commercial and critical failure of the last generation.

 

From a franchise owner's perspective though it is far simpler to define the term. A reboot is a method of extending the existing brand recognition factors (Identity and Equity) into a new generation of consumers. It is the "best" strategy to use in recovering from a product failure; a reboot offers the potential to nullify history and disconnect stagnant, or failed, product from the next generation. Finally, but most importantly Rebooting is a strategy that "protects" investment far more than an untested IP.

 

The iconoclastic approach in the ending of the last franchise; symbolically destroying most of the major brand identifiers and brand investment figures to suit an artistic motivation, suggests to me that Mass Effect was not intended to become anything more than a stand alone trilogy of games. This was a continuation of the BioWare  brand model (a brand with a history of dropping franchises and moving into new IP's, rather than exhausting the market potential of an IP. ME:A breaks that business model and installs a new methodology. Another indicator of a Reboot strategy

 

For me; the term reboot is the one that best fits into the strategies and motivations of the franchise holders and the historical analysis of the brand. I would go far as to say that "Total Reboot" should be the one that fan's use in basing their future investment in the series and that they should be more aware of the tricks marketeers will attempt to use in confusing the language.

[RoboticWater]

I base my perspective on my career experience in brand equity and identity management. I got into the franchise not as a gamer but for professional reasons;  to analyze the brand equity crisis' that played out in 2012-2013, and to observe the impact social media has during a brand equity crisis. The ME3 consumer reception and performance of the BioWare brand in the period between 2010 and Y/E 2013 was, for me, one of the greatest brand equity failures in the 21st century games industry to date.

 

That isn't a disgruntled fan unhappy with the ending etc, it's an observation informed by a systematic analysis of a brand's equity and identity perceptions across a large number of consumers, and across an extended time frame.

 

For me ME:A is a comprehensive franchise regeneration exercise or "total reboot", but I do not think that you will hear many BioWare marketeers use that language to describe ME:A. (Most marketeers avoid the terminology of "reboot" or will attempt to confuse the definition as much as possible). Possibly the major motive for avoiding the term reboot is that most definitions suggest a response to the commercial and critical failure of the last generation.

 

From a franchise owner's perspective though it is far simpler to define the term. A reboot is a method of extending the existing brand recognition factors (Identity and Equity) into a new generation of consumers. It is the "best" strategy to use in recovering from a product failure; a reboot offers the potential to nullify history and disconnect stagnant, or failed, product from the next generation. Finally, but most importantly Rebooting is a strategy that "protects" investment far more than an untested IP.

 

The iconoclastic approach in the ending of the last franchise; symbolically destroying most of the major brand identifiers and brand investment figures to suit an artistic motivation, suggests to me that Mass Effect was not intended to become anything more than a stand alone trilogy of games. This was a continuation of the BioWare  brand model (a brand with a history of dropping franchises and moving into new IP's, rather than exhausting the market potential of an IP. ME:A breaks that business model and installs a new methodology. Another indicator of a Reboot strategy

 

For me; the term reboot is the one that best fits into the strategies and motivations of the franchise holders and the historical analysis of the brand. I would go far as to say that "Total Reboot" should be the one that fan's use in basing their future investment in the series and that they should be more aware of the tricks marketeers will attempt to use in confusing the language.

Do you consider TNG, DS9, or Voyager a reboot? I'm willing to agree that ME:A is a reboot so long as we classify it as such solely for taxonomic purposes and not for some veiled attempt to make the game seem like a lesser product.

 

However, I'd disagree that Mass Effect existed singularly to serve one trilogy. It may have started that way (to keep the writers from getting distracted from the story at hand), but the deep exploration of various cultures and the establishment of various iconic technologies leads me to believe that BioWare had some intent to continue the brand elsewhere like Star Trek or Star Wars.

 

Obviously, keeping the Mass Effect name helps out marketing and brand awareness, and the new setting is an easy way to keep the slate clean. With Andromeda, BioWare seem to want to keep mining into the concept of Mass Effect. Maybe I'm not entirely correct about my definition of reboot, but I see reboots as doing the same thing (setting and all), but doing it newer. That's what the recent Trek reboot would have me believe. I just generally see reboots as a "new origin story," kind of deal like Tomb Raider.

[Sartoz]

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

 

Frankly, I don't care.

 

I want to tackle the joys and hardships of a new engaging adventure, with new characters in a new setting, with a lovely female alien and with kick-ass squad mates. 

 

Nothing else required.

 

Edit: PS Bio--- make sure to properly code the game controls for PC input devices = keyboard and mouse, including complete freedom for key remapping.

 

Edit: spelling corrections

Modifié par Sartoz, 16 août 2015 - 09:43 .

[Amplitudelol]

It's not a reboot more like of a FRESH RESTART of the franchise while not acknowledging it as a restart despite the contrary.

 

I have been making these Alternate Universe/Reboot/Restart theories like crazy for the past 5 months already.

 

And yes some fans did call it as a quote: cowardly act for not facing their mistakes and fixing or making one ending atleast canon. Yes fans would be angry about canon because they want the ultimate desicion crazy crap for themselves but where did that crap got us now? THE DEATH OF THE MILKYWAY We can take shepard and company dying but the whole entire galaxy erased because of RGB? 

 

Now Bioware defenders would argue that Mass Effect is not just "about milkyway, shepard, and company" ! then I WOULD PERSONALLY ASK THEM WHAT MAKES MASS EFFECT MASS EFFECT? is it the sci-fi theme? romance? combat? exploration? shiet there are tons of other alternatives out there! whether they admit it or not, Shepard and friends DID MAKE AN IMPACT WITH THE MASS EFFECT SERIES they are just being hypocrites. Every character they made contributed something to the franchise and they are all assets which will be thrown under the rug now due to RGB and all for the sake of artistic integrity BS. We could have gotten both old and new characters but nope. It's like saying Cloud Strife is not important in Final Fantasy or Gordon Freeman is worthless in Half Life or Master Chief is just a support character in the Halo universe. Am I looking forward to Andromeda? yes but I am still debating whether I should buy it or not

 

Half Life 3 confirmed!!

[LinksOcarina]

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

 

Frankly, I don't care.

 

I want to tackle the joys and hardships of a new engaging adventure, with new characters in a new setting, with a lovely female alien and with kick-ass squad mates. 

 

Nothing else required.

 

Works for me, so long as the game is fun and engaging I'll be satisfied.

[Eryri]

Andromeda is basically The Next Generation for Mass Effect.
 

So, if that comparison holds true, we can expect the first few instalments of the Andromeda game(s) to be marred by lacklustre writing, stilted acting and ropey special effects. Then, the First Officer will grow a beard and the series will markedly improve and become a beloved sci if classic, before it spoils its own legacy with a disappointing final chapter where the villain is a clone of the hero and the franchise's most beloved character gets killed off for incredibly silly reasons...

Sorry I've confused myself. I'm not sure which franchise I'm talking about any more...

[Iakus]

So, if that comparison holds true, we can expect the first few instalments of the Andromeda game(s) to be marred by lacklustre writing, stilted acting and ropey special effects. Then, the First Officer will grow a beard and the series will markedly improve and become a beloved sci if classic, before it spoils its own legacy with a disappointing final chapter where the villain is a clone of the hero and the franchise's most beloved character gets killed off for incredibly silly reasons...

Sorry I've confused myself. I'm not sure which franchise I'm talking about any more...

You're not the only one 

[LinksOcarina]

So, if that comparison holds true, we can expect the first few instalments of the Andromeda game(s) to be marred by lacklustre writing, stilted acting and ropey special effects. Then, the First Officer will grow a beard and the series will markedly improve and become a beloved sci if classic, before it spoils its own legacy with a disappointing final chapter where the villain is a clone of the hero and the franchise's most beloved character gets killed off for incredibly silly reasons...

Sorry I've confused myself. I'm not sure which franchise I'm talking about any more...

 

Now be fair, all Star Trek series suck in general.

 

Outside of Deep Space Nine, of course.

[Gramorla]

the 1-3 years of every star trek series are suck in many ways. Then they find some kind of balance for 1-3 soesons befor they die on a lacke of new ideas and burnout main-characters.