124 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

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

 

Outside of Deep Space Nine, of course.

 

And a large part of that it is that DS9 - when it was good - moved away from some of the ST conventions that make writing good stories difficult.

[N7Jamaican]

Could it be a reboot? Possibly.  I see it like this, it's the continuation of Mass Effect.  Familiar races, familiar tech, familiar lore with the addition of new races, new tech, and new lore (etc).  Changing the setting, doesn't necessarily mean reboot.

Modifié par N7Jamaican, 15 août 2015 - 08:50 .

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Could it be a reboot? Possibly.  I see it like this, it's the continuation of Mass Effect.  Familiar faces, familiar tech, familiar lore with the addition of new faces, new tech, and new lore (etc).  Changing the setting, doesn't necessarily mean reboot.

They said there would be no familiar faces in a tweet. 

[N7Jamaican]

They said there would be no familiar faces in a tweet. 

I meant races.  Typo on my part.  

[Sanunes]

This is how I see it.

 

1) BioWare brings back Shepard.  People call BioWare names and the BSN is full of angry posts and backseat developers.

2) BioWare tries something new.  People call BioWare names and the BSN is full of angry posts and backseat developers.

 

No matter what people are saying I am pretty sure there is going to be an equally negative backlash against anything BioWare decides for any of their games. I am also seeing that attitude towards other developers too, for I am disappointed at the reaction the community has had towards CDPR and their modkit because it isn't a full blown toolkit.

[AlleyD]

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.

 

I would consider TNG more of a total reboot (re-positioning the core of a franchise into a new generation of consumers) and DS9 and Voyager more of Secondary Franchise Extensions, aimed at increasing the brand foot print.

 

I'm not making any veiled attempt at making any of the Mass Effect games lesser products; only making some comments on my observations of a brand that experienced a period of crisis and disconnect with a significant portion of its consumer base. And how that crisis imposed a  riskier form of franchise extension strategy to be deployed in this generation of products.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

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 might be is what is called a soft reboot ie keeping most of the old continuity but moving it into the future (this is actually an old trick in comics where 1 year has past and all of the previous stories and conflicts have been resolved) or new place.  

[hostaman]

 

 

Or am I missing seeing something important here?

 

OP I'm afraid you're missing something fairly obvious, it's called commerce.

 

ME was a trilogy, it had a start and an end, it was a fully realised story with no sequel potential.

 

Unfortunately game players (much like movie goers) are idiots.

 

We seldom risk our money on new IP, and prefer instead to play COD 56 or GTA 79.

 

It is for this reason we get a recognizable title like "Mass effect", "Star Wars", "Star Trek" to draw our idiot selves in.

 

Like most of the morons on this forum, I too will hand over my money for a new ME game with almost no tie to the others because:

 

1. BW still have a great deal of Kudos with me for the fantastic ME2 and the utterly addictive MP in ME3
2. I'm intrigued to see where they're going next.
3. Most of the current next gen games have been pretty meh.

[The Arbiter]

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

 

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

ODST and Blueshift did sell because it expanded the Universe these games where in but if it were to replace Chief and Freeman? hahahahha

[The Arbiter]

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.

This guy so much win. This is what I was trying to say, the assets and intellectual properties of the previous 3 games including the Milkyway destroyed 

[The Arbiter]

This is how I see it.

 

1) BioWare brings back Shepard.  People call BioWare names and the BSN is full of angry posts and backseat developers.

2) BioWare tries something new.  People call BioWare names and the BSN is full of angry posts and backseat developers.

 

No matter what people are saying I am pretty sure there is going to be an equally negative backlash against anything BioWare decides for any of their games. I am also seeing that attitude towards other developers too, for I am disappointed at the reaction the community has had towards CDPR and their modkit because it isn't a full blown toolkit.

Then BioWare should stop listening to fans which would lead to the destruction of their games in the first place. I mean wtf they created MassEffect in the Milkyway along with Shep and the Reapers only to be rekt because of RGB fan choices that the fans wanted so much. Do I support them this time in Andromeda? yes I wish them luck but my first thought was to patch the hell out of 3 and move on to Andromeda or expand Milkyway along with Andromeda... too bad we can't get both

[Steelcan]

its not a reboot so much as its a delaying action.

 

Perhaps they intend to delay indefinitely, but I have little doubt that they are just trying to keep the franchise going before it collapses on itself.  Or I guess they can just go to the next nearest galaxy

[Sanunes]

Then BioWare should stop listening to fans which would lead to the destruction of their games in the first place. I mean wtf they created MassEffect in the Milkyway along with Shep and the Reapers only to be rekt because of RGB fan choices that the fans wanted so much. Do I support them this time in Andromeda? yes I wish them luck but my first thought was to patch the hell out of 3 and move on to Andromeda or expand Milkyway along with Andromeda... too bad we can't get both

 

How do you know that? For they always talked about Shepard's story as a trilogy even back with Mass Effect 1, maybe leaving the Milky Way is based more on the endings, but I am pretty sure we wouldn't have Shepard and Crew with Andromeda.

[The Arbiter]

How do you know that? For they always talked about Shepard's story as a trilogy even back with Mass Effect 1, maybe leaving the Milky Way is based more on the endings, but I am pretty sure we wouldn't have Shepard and Crew with Andromeda.

look around you. Exploration was removed in ME1 because fans b!tched about it, Planetary minings in ME2 was removed because fans B!tched about it, then in ME3 fans asked for total control or decision making which ultimately lead BioWare to the RGB endings without canon so that they can just please their fans but fans still b!tched about it. If these fans just kept their mouths shut for once we could have gotten a planetary exploration, mining, and a good canon ending. BUT NOOOOOOOO the universe loves diversity. I think this is what Andromeda is doing to regain control of the franchise from the raging lunatics asking for everything with never ending satisfaction... too bad the damage has been done already.

[Sanunes]

look around you. Exploration was removed in ME1 because fans b!tched about it, Planetary minings in ME2 was removed because fans B!tched about it, then in ME3 fans asked for total control or decision making which ultimately lead BioWare to the RGB endings without canon so that they can just please their fans but fans still b!tched about it. If these fans just kept their mouths shut for once we could have gotten a planetary exploration, mining, and a good canon ending. BUT NOOOOOOOO the universe loves diversity. I think this is what Andromeda is doing to regain control of the franchise from the raging lunatics asking for everything with never ending satisfaction... too bad the damage has been done already.

I do agree that changes were made based on what people were saying. I just don't think that everything that is going on is purely based on catering to everything that was requested. I wasn't expecting to be playing Shepard after Mass Effect 2 with some of the comments made by BioWare and with the amount of squadmate deaths in Mass Effect 1 and 2 I am glad they aren't trying to incorporate them again. Moving to Andromeda could be a consequence, but we have explored a lot of The Milky Way already and there have been a lot of codex entries on planets we haven't visited.

[Voodoo Dancer]

they should have just made this the beginning of a new franchise and left the mass effect name out of it , then they wouldn't have to mention or worry about shepard or reapers or anything . coulda been a clean slate. 

[The Arbiter]

they should have just made this the beginning of a new franchise and left the mass effect name out of it , then they wouldn't have to mention or worry about shepard or reapers or anything . coulda been a clean slate. 

agreed. Should have been called a different game but then again no body would be able to recognize it or would just call it a Mass Effect clone. But in all honesty that seems better to be a clean new game rather than bearing the same name which freaking garnered huge controversy in the past even today

[Voodoo Dancer]

i don't think mass effect name recognition would have mattered all that much , it would still be a new bioware game and we would all probably be eagerly awaiting anything new they brought out after all these years of playing their games .

[Broganisity]

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.

 

The problem is that fans do not allow the developers to branch out of the series, especially as you solidify the franchise.

The Mario Flagship? Pfft, you've had games where the main character is Mario, but also Donkey Kong, Yoshi, Peach, Toad, Luigi, Wario. . .Yes, Donkey Kong and Yoshi are still considered sub-franchises of the Mario Flagship. No one bats an eye when there's a new 'Yoshi' Game, because they are used to all these sub-franchises/other world views.

Now, the moment you try to make a Metroid game where the main character isn't Samus? With the amount of games in the series (and the time between releases. . .not to mention the reception of the last game in the series), you get fans who are anxious and not wanting for change even with the possibility of that change adding something you never thought you wanted in the franchise prior.

If you want to have multiple protagonists and viewpoints in the universe, you have to start out early on in the franchise, before its too late to avoid critical fan backlash. Mass Effect has this chance right now, though I can't say I like how we got to the opportunity, it is one worth taking.

[Sartoz]

look around you. Exploration was removed in ME1 because fans b!tched about it, Planetary minings in ME2 was removed because fans B!tched about it, then in ME3 fans asked for total control or decision making which ultimately lead BioWare to the RGB endings without canon so that they can just please their fans but fans still b!tched about it. If these fans just kept their mouths shut for once we could have gotten a planetary exploration, mining, and a good canon ending. BUT NOOOOOOOO the universe loves diversity. I think this is what Andromeda is doing to regain control of the franchise from the raging lunatics asking for everything with never ending satisfaction... too bad the damage has been done already.

 

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

 

Well, you must admit that exploration with the Mako in ME1 is a super pain in the butt. I, for one, am glad Bio removed that primitive implementation of resource gathering over constant rocky terrain, using the god awful Mako. Bio's idea of planetary exploration and mining better be revolutionary in ME:A. So far, their ideas suck dry mammary glands.

 

Andromeda is a new story, Some familiar races, the Mako and N7 ties it in with Shep's universe.  That's is good enough for me.

[Sanunes]

The problem is that fans do not allow the developers to branch out of the series, especially as you solidify the franchise.

The Mario Flagship? Pfft, you've had games where the main character is Mario, but also Donkey Kong, Yoshi, Peach, Toad, Luigi, Wario. . .Yes, Donkey Kong and Yoshi are still considered sub-franchises of the Mario Flagship. No one bats an eye when there's a new 'Yoshi' Game, because they are used to all these sub-franchises/other world views.

Now, the moment you try to make a Metroid game where the main character isn't Samus? With the amount of games in the series (and the time between releases. . .not to mention the reception of the last game in the series), you get fans who are anxious and not wanting for change even with the possibility of that change adding something you never thought you wanted in the franchise prior.

If you want to have multiple protagonists and viewpoints in the universe, you have to start out early on in the franchise, before its too late to avoid critical fan backlash. Mass Effect has this chance right now, though I can't say I like how we got to the opportunity, it is one worth taking.

 

I doubt even if they branched out after the very first game people would have been willing to accept it.  In some ways they have been branching out the story since the first game in the novels, comics, and Mass Effect: Infiltrator.  BioWare was warning us around the launch of Mass Effect 2 (if I remember correctly) that Shepard's story will end with Mass Effect 3, long before any of the issues around Mass Effect 3.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

But two or three games in Andromeda and then they can return to the Milky Way without any problem.

 

Why?

 

First it will be 2026 and most of the players of the original series will have moved on to other things in their lives and thus the catastrophe of the of the ME3 ending and all the crap associated with the original series will have been forgotten except by maybe 10% of the players now involved with the series. Some of us may even be dead. So no worries from this group.

 

Second, because of the events of the above paragraph, they can write pretty much anything they want in the Milky Way and even rewrite the lore. No one will know the difference because the old games won't run on the new systems, Drew's books will be out of print. It's a win.

 

Time heals all wounds.

[Amplitudelol]

But two or three games in Andromeda and then they can return to the Milky Way without any problem.

 

Why?

 

First it will be 2026 and most of the players of the original series will have moved on to other things in their lives and thus the catastrophe of the of the ME3 ending and all the crap associated with the original series will have been forgotten except by maybe 10% of the players now involved with the series. Some of us may even be dead. So no worries from this group.

 

Second, because of the events of the above paragraph, they can write pretty much anything they want in the Milky Way and even rewrite the lore. No one will know the difference because the old games won't run on the new systems, Drew's books will be out of print. It's a win.

 

Time heals all wounds.

 

Im imagining the meeting when one of the EA marketing guys presents the idea of waiting for the ME3 players to die out one by one until 2026 as a solution. What a morbid scenario. xD

[RoboticWater]

they should have just made this the beginning of a new franchise and left the mass effect name out of it , then they wouldn't have to mention or worry about shepard or reapers or anything . coulda been a clean slate. 

Given the options between major brand awareness and a slightly annoyed minority of core fans, BioWare made the better decision.

[Andrew Lucas]

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

It's the same thing, sequel, direct or not.



You were saying?