751 réponses à ce sujet

[Mathias]

Aside from ME3 severely boning the Milky Way and potential for sequels therein, sure. No reason at all.

 

 

Forgive me for reiterating a point I made earlier, but Mass Effect is my favorite game series of all time. No really, it's my top favorite. But the ending to ME3 ruined it for me. Not trying to sound over dramatic, but it's true. I cannot replay the trilogy without being soured by what it's all leading up to. How my choices don't mean a thing, and no matter how I play these games, I'm still railroaded into a horrible situation, and forced to make three horrible decisions by an AI who's basically an idiot. An idiot who has the power to wipe us all out unless I do what he says. And I'm sorry, but whenever I talk to the Catalyst, I feel like I'm talking to Mac Walters condescending me. I really do. ESPECIALLY in the Extended Cut. 

 

This is why I love the idea of starting fresh and going to another galaxy. Just a brand new slate for me to focus my energy on. I still like playing ME1 and ME2, but there's this little dark cloud that follows me that grows in size as I get to ME3.

 

 

That's possible

 

As I've posted in other threads I do believe the next game after Andromeda will take place in the Milky Way featuring Shepard regardless how well Andromeda sells. I like for Andromeda to do very well. Only time will answer that

 

The other thing is why not have two teams make a Mass Effect game? One team, the current team, continue in Andromeda and another team make a games in the Milky Way.  I might be the only one on the planet who has this thought.

It's worth considering that if Andromeda comes out and fans love it, they're probably going to want to see more of it. Not to mention having grown attached to the new protagonist and characters.

[dreamgazer]

Yes because that worked so well in Dragon Age...
 
The fact is there are plenty of ways to continue in the Milky Way and provide a great gaming experience, great writing and plenty of exploration without the need to resort to another Galaxy. The only reason to do that is because of a recognition of just how badly they messed up ME3's ending and a refusal to deal with the mess they created. In short, Andromeda (the setting, not the game) is one giant cop out.

The ending could've been the greatest piece of literature ever written, and we'd still be in the same place had it featured any big choice or divergence of fate.

[saladinbob]

The ending could've been the greatest piece of literature ever written, and we'd still be in the same place had it featured any big choice or divergence of fate.

 

I'm not entirely sure I follow?

[Malanek]

You have to understand the incredibly awkward position the new team has been put in. Mass Effect 3's ending was written in such a way that they really left no room for a sequel, unless an ending is canonized. As much as I'm sure some of us would be happy for them to just say "Screw it" and canonize Destroy, the reality is that canonizing any ending would be a huge PR mistake and cause another controversy. 

Although I agree that they would need to "canonize" an ending I really don't see what is wrong with that. It's not saying this outcome was right, or those outcomes were bad decisions, or your choices didn't really happen. It's simply saying, if this happened, then this is what happened next. Rather than exploring none of the results, you get to explore some of the results. Personally I would find it interesting to see what happened even to something I never picked.

 

And since, by your own argument, the world state can't be imported, you can't even use the argument that by not setting a default story state it will feel more personal. Because there is nothing personalised at all.

 

And just to go off on a tangent somewhat, there has not once been a good (or even decent) import done in any bioware game. First of all I thought the idea that was introduced in DA2 sounded really cool. A world that would respond to your choices and could be shaped over the course of multiple games. Wahoo!!! Awesome. But then on seeing the results it turned out to be completely superficial. There was an illusion of reactivity that was simply mirrored whatever you chose and all outcomes got channeled together. it makes all your choices seem completely pointless because they don't really alter anything important!

 

And even worse they make the story weaker. Not only are additional resources devoted to maintaining this illusion, it actively removes story elements that could have made for interesting plots. The DA god baby can't be used for anything important, because it may not exist. The anvil of the void (which should completely alter the political balance of Thedas) cant be explored because it might have been destroyed. We can't see the results of curing the genophage, wiping out the quarians, or destroying the reapers, because none of those might have happened. It's frustrating because these are all really interesting story points that should have dramatic effects on the world, but they are sacrificed just because some players, who despite the fact they have done 10 different playthroughs, want to feel it is a direct continuation of their main game.

 

Having given this angry rant, I still think Andromeda can and will be a good story in a good game. I just don't think the story import method is a good feature at all.

[dreamgazer]

I'm not entirely sure I follow?

Whether the writing was perfect or flawed, BioWare would still have to deal with branching variables if they had a meaningful choice or divergence in the ending, like the previous two games. The quality of writing really doesn't have anything to do with it. They'd still have to deal with different end-states, which were already getting difficult to juggle.

It doesn't matter if it's a perfectly-written ending with divergence or the worst piece of writing with divergence. BioWare would still have the same problem.

[Il Divo]

I'm not entirely sure I follow?

 

Essentially that the ending issue isn't just about escaping the Milky Way because people may have hated them. Out of sheer curiosity, how many games has Bioware made in the exact same setting where the player has the ability to make world-shattering decisions? And without badly retconning  those decisions? You could argue that ME:A's escape to another galaxy is no different than ME2's exile to the Terminus Systems to avoid all issues of consequence from ME1. ​

 

ME3's endings don't offer a reprieve from that. We can't simply "move far away" the way we do with Dragon Age because the endings affect every last aspect of the Milky Way universe.

[saladinbob]

Having a canonized ending is essential if it was to be set in the Milky Way but there is nothing to say the canonized ending had to be one of the choices available to you in ME3. At least insofar as they were presented. For example, they could have canonized the Star Trek The Motion Picture ending and set the premise of the new game of finding out the ultimate fate of Shepard.

 

Did he really transcend his physical form? From the outside perspective - the people of the galaxy - that isn't known which then would allow Bioware to take liberties with that ending and re-work it in to something more palatable than what we were left with and preferable to the whole ark theory/wormhole nonsense they've come up with. We could have seen what a post-Reaper invasion galaxy looked like. They could have tackled contemporary issues like mass migration.

 

But no, what they did was bury their head in the sand, pretending those endings never happened. All Bioware are doing is running away from their mistakes of the past rather than having the stones to tackle it head on. It is, like I said, a cop out.

[Ahglock]

That's just a polite way of saying they don't get it.

 

It was a high bar to get over, but you managed to do it and deliver the dumbest post in this thread.

[Il Divo]

Having a canonized ending is essential if it was to be set in the Milky Way but there is nothing to say the canonized ending had to be one of the choices available to you in ME3. At least insofar as they were presented. For example, they could have canonized the Star Trek The Motion Picture ending and set the premise of the new game of finding out the ultimate fate of Shepard.

 

Did he really transcend his physical form? From the outside perspective - the people of the galaxy - that isn't known which then would allow Bioware to take liberties with that ending and re-work it in to something more palatable than what we were left with and preferable to the whole ark theory/wormhole nonsense they've come up with. We could have seen what a post-Reaper invasion galaxy looked like. They could have tackled contemporary issues like mass migration.

 

But no, what they did was bury their head in the sand, pretending those endings never happened. All Bioware are doing is running away from their mistakes of the past rather than having the stones to tackle it head on. It is, like I said, a cop out.

 

Considering you just advocated for yet another "Shepard-centric" tale, count me skeptical. Bioware being done with Commander Shepard was announced before ME3's release. Is this genuinely about ME:A's direction, or is this another attempt at bringing Shepard back somehow? We tend to get a lot of that around here.

​

But as much as some people here are claiming concern for the integrity of the ME universe, it often sounds like they don't actually want the endings tackled. Your alternate universe is as much a "cop-out" in terms of addressing the ending as Andromeda is. If our concern is honestly Bioware tackling the endings head on, why not go the Synthesis route? That one does seem to take the most hits when people criticize the ending. I can't say it gets more head on than that.

[AlanC9]

The fact is there are plenty of ways to continue in the Milky Way and provide a great gaming experience, great writing and plenty of exploration without the need to resort to another Galaxy. The only reason to do that is because of a recognition of just how badly they messed up ME3's ending and a refusal to deal with the mess they created. In short, Andromeda (the setting, not the game) is one giant cop out.

What would "dealing with it" look like?

[Mathias]

It was a high bar to get over, but you managed to do it and deliver the dumbest post in this thread.

 

By telling you like it is? Sure pal. I don't coddle people's opinions when I know they're being irrational. This is pretty cut and dry. If you think they should've canonized or retcon the endings, then you don't understand how maintaining good public relations is an important factor to running a business. End of story.

 

The ending debacle was a PR nightmare for Bioware that ended up costing them (or EA) money to patch up. It's flat out stupid to suggest they should open up pandora's box again by doing something as extreme as flat out changing the ending in order to satisfy the few who are still reeling mad. Even if they decided to canonize or retcon the endings and then bury their heads in the sand, trying to make the best game possible, it's just creating unnecessary stress in an already highly stressful environment.

[Mathias]

The few that are reeling mad aren't really worth it at this point. Some customers will cost Bioware more money than they're worth. Best to ditch them and pick up some new customers.

 

Some people may not have thought about how EA/Bioware actually lost money because of the ending backlash. We don't know how much, but they had to devote time and resources into making an Extended Ending that they didn't profit off of. An extended ending that flat out stated "We'll expand on the ending. But we are sticking to our vision."

 

Why would they even want to flirt with the idea of opening up that can of worms again? When you make a public statement like that, but then go back on your word, it doesn't make you look good.

[FKA_Servo]

From what is seen so far it hardly resembles ME.

Speaking as a recently self-appointed expert on this very subject - you're wrong.

[Lady Artifice]

I agree with the general sentiment of the OP, even if I do find the delivery high-handed. Any effort to keep the setting in the Milky way would have been a logistical nightmare. 

[KaiserShep]

But no, what they did was bury their head in the sand, pretending those endings never happened. All Bioware are doing is running away from their mistakes of the past rather than having the stones to tackle it head on. It is, like I said, a cop out.

 

In this respect, there's no way BioWare could really win. Tackling the ending head on would be too complicated to be worth the effort. It doesn't even matter if they and some fans think the ending is the worst thing since the West Nile virus, or people loved the endings and it gave random nerds orgasms in rapid succession. The task of somehow crafting a story that directly addresses the various outcomes would be ridiculous, to say the least. What they'd end up with is tons of handwaves and retcons and people would just say "biower is totes lazy". 

[KaiserShep]

The Extended Cut was a form of compensation, for everyone. Not just the fans who wanted a completely new ending.

 

I rather like the Extended Cut, myself. It's sure as hell better than the original ending to me. 

[themikefest]

the best thing about the extended cut is it fixed the flashbacks when choosing an ending

[Zatche]

What would "dealing with it" look like?

 

Also, why is it important? What goal does it accomplish?

[Puddi III]

I think people really overblow this hypothetical "PR nightmare" that canonizing would really cause and conflate it with their own distaste for the idea since they have a million playthroughs choosing all three endings.

A PR nightmare is delivering a game with a colossally moronic ending that literally no one likes.

Or closing the off-topic subforum.

I wish.

But canonizing stuff happens all the time, and I really don't think it would be such a big deal. Understand that by waiting for years on the official forums that the devs don't give a crap about for any trickle of information that the devs put out on other social networks, you're sort of here in this hyper-invested hyper-minority of people who aren't really the core audience that BioWare bases their marketing decisions around. Casual fans would probably look at canonizing an ending and just go, "oh, ok."

And we are still talking as if canonizing an ending or combining all three are the only two Milky Way options, when there is also the option to split the timeline, or do side-stories, prequels, etc.

For the record, running away to Andromeda is another option that I happen to be perfectly fine with. Just all the tortured reasoning to justify it is tiresome.

They did it cuz they wanted to.

All that needs to be said.

[Swordfishtrombone]

I rather like the Extended Cut, myself. It's sure as hell better than the original ending to me. 

 

For me, it didn't address any of the reasons I hated the ending; it was like putting a brand new paint job on a sinking ship. Might look nice, but the fundamental problem remains. 

[Killroy]

I read a few posts online where some thought the ending was brilliant. Even some guy I talked to IRL liked the ending as well.

 

Some people are just stupid. Nothing you can do about that.

[Drone223]

Speaking as a recently self-appointed expert on this very subject - you're wrong.

A lot of what has been shown can easily be found in other sci-fi series.