751 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

As for Synthesis, I think that's the ending that would present the most difficulty in canonisation, given that it would create far more problems than it solved. Here's an enemy that that since time immemorial no race has been able to stand up to, including their creators, who is suddenly living alongside the races of the galaxy, helping them rebuild and sharing technology with them, so who becomes the antagonist in the new game? The game's enemy would have to be so supremely powerful in order to represent a threat the Reapers couldn't contend that any suggestion that mere mortals could defeat them would be laughable to put it politely. That particular ending is a can of worms that should never be opened.

 

.

 

I think Dean hit all the relevant points but just to reiterate your argument:

 

"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."
 

That's essentially my point regarding Synthesis being the most applicable, since it was regarded by many as the most problematic ending and would represent Bioware being the most ambitious. If we're going to employ rhetoric about Bioware having no balls, we should at least be completely blunt and call canonized destroy (or any alternate universe) what it is: a cop-out.

 

Even for the people insisting on how ME:A is retaining nothing characteristic about Mass Effect, Synthesis offers a few extra solutions: the Reapers are still around, the Geth have not been murdered, etc. And those are all pretty iconic. 

 

Regarding this "supremely powerful entity", not necessarily. A smaller scale enemy is actually more appropriate, since we already went full "save the galaxy" status for 3 games. If Bioware tried that again, no plot line would ever be comparable given the scale of the Reapers as a threat, I'd argue.

[Swordfishtrombone]

I think Dean hit all the relevant points but just to reiterate your argument:

 

"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."
 

Hence the point regarding Synthesis being the most applicable, since it was regarded by many as the most problematic ending and would represent Bioware being the most ambitious. If we're going to employ rhetoric about Bioware having no balls, we should at least be completely blunt and call canonized destroy what it is: a cop-out.

 

Even for the people insisting on how ME:A is retaining nothing characteristic about Mass Effect, Synthesis offers a few extra solutions: the Reapers are still around, the Geth have not been murdered, etc. And those are all pretty iconic. 

 

Regarding this "supremely powerful entity", not necessarily. A smaller scale enemy is actually more appropriate, since we already went full "save the galaxy" status for 3 games. If Bioware tried that again, no plot line would ever be comparable given the scale of the Reapers as a threat, I'd argue.

 

The presence of the "Synthesis" option I felt as a total insult to my intelligence. A beam of... something magically transforming everything organic and everything synthetic into half-organic-half-synthetic things is so far out of the genre of SCIENCE-fiction, and so deep into pure fantasy, that it grossly violated the genre I thought I had been playing for the last three games, up until that point. It is something that clearly should not have been possible within the Mass Effect universe, that is still supposed to function on some sort of laws of nature. 

 

It's so silly as not even to have a conceivable science-babble explanation as to the mechanisms how something like that could happen. And that is a BIG no-no in any science-fiction worth the name. 

 

So if Bioware would somehow figure that they could canonize the silly-fantasy-ending, and not further insult at least a significant portion of the sci-fi minded player base, and actually did canonize that ending, that would end my interest in the Mass Effect universe - I don't care how good the game was supposed to be, I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. 

 

Just the presence of that cursed ending ALMOST managed to drive me away from the series. After seeing the ending, I could not bring myself to even look at any of the Mass Effect games for about a year. 

[Il Divo]

^And that's fine, provided that we abandon the argument that Bioware just doesn't have the guts to do it. This is directed specifically at that position.

 

I personally have no interest in any ending taking in place in the aftermath of ME3.

[Swordfishtrombone]

^And that's fine, provided that we abandon the argument that Bioware just doesn't have the guts to do it. This is directed specifically at that position.

 

I personally have no interest in any ending taking in place in the aftermath of ME3.

 

Oh, totally agreed on that. I don't think the choice to go to Andromeda has anything to do with "guts", but rather with the quite reasonable avoiding of the mess of widely varying alternative worlds (depending on the chosen ending) left behind in the Milky Way after ME3, and the overwhelmingly negative reception the endings got. I think they just want to move on, and not do anything to prompt the ME3 ending excrement-storm to rise again.

[Mathias]

See the dominant force on the board here is "destroy enders". Yet I know some people who chose synthesis and loved the ending of the game. They're waiting on the next Mass Effect game and are wondering how Bioware will deal with the endings.

I would say choosing Synthesis as an ending, and "liking" ME3's ending, are pretty close cousins to each other. Most people I've seen who favorite Synthesis over the others, ended up liking the ending as a whole.

[Drone223]

So basically what you're saying is that it's like all three previous Mass Effect games and every single other artistic endeavor ever?

I love Mass Effect to tiny little pieces, but I'd never accuse it of being staggeringly original. It's an artfully assembled pastiche of a bunch of stuff we've all seen a million times before. It's all in the execution, and that doesn't hinge on where in the universe everything goes down.

I really, really don't understand your perspective on this.

I never said ME was completely original but if it wasn't for the N7 logo showing up then what was seen could've easily been taken for a new IP.

[FlyingSquirrel]

I never said ME was completely original but if it wasn't for the N7 logo showing up then what was seen could've easily been taken for a new IP.

 

I suspect that Bioware thinks there's some life left in the existing species and their history and backgrounds. While some of that will be less front-and-center now that they're leaving the Milky Way, I'd still like to see more of humans, asari, salarians, turians, krogan, etc. interacting and working together than a completely new set of alien races.

[FKA_Servo]

I never said ME was completely original but if it wasn't for the N7 logo showing up then what was seen could've easily been taken for a new IP.

 

The reason I know you're wrong about this one is that I have working eyes and a familiarity with the franchise.

 

So possibly for someone who's never played a Mass Effect game, but is hazily familiar with the "N7" branding, it might serve. The second the camera pulls out on the dude's back though, the armor and cockpit design starts screaming Mass Effect. Once he pulls out the pistol and the omni-tool, the scream becomes deafening.

[Swordfishtrombone]

I would say choosing Synthesis as an ending, and "liking" ME3's ending, are pretty close cousins to each other. Most people I've seen who favorite Synthesis over the others, ended up liking the ending as a whole.

 

People that like the synthesis cannot have high standards when it comes to specifically the science fiction genre - you REALLY can't think about the synthesis option, and it's plausibility in a world that's supposed to be a rational one, not pure fantasy world, and still like the ending. 

 

I have no doubt that there are many players out there who don't even consider such things as plausibility within a science fiction universe, but for those of us that do, the synthesis option was a slap in the face. 

[Drone223]

The reason I know you're wrong about this one is that I have working eyes and a familiarity with the franchise.

 

So possibly for someone who's never played a Mass Effect game, but is hazily familiar with the "N7" branding, it might serve. The second the camera pulls out on the dude's back though, the armor and cockpit design starts screaming Mass Effect. Once he pulls out the pistol and the omni-tool, the scream becomes deafening.

Those appear around the same time as the N7 logo so my point still stands.

[Killroy]

Those appear around the same time as the N7 logo so my point still stands.

 

Unreal. You literally ignore reality.

[AlanC9]

People that like the synthesis cannot have high standards when it comes to specifically the science fiction genre - you REALLY can't think about the synthesis option, and it's plausibility in a world that's supposed to be a rational one, not pure fantasy world, and still like the ending.

You can't have medium-high standards, anyway. If your standards are really high then ME failed them long ago, and more hooey won't necessarily make the series worse for you.

[AlanC9]

Those appear around the same time as the N7 logo so my point still stands.

Well, it might have stood if your point was "I never said ME was completely original but if it wasn't for the N7 logo, armor, cockpit design, weapon design and omni-tool showing up then what was seen could've easily been taken for a new IP.

[FKA_Servo]

Those appear around the same time as the N7 logo so my point still stands.

 

I watched the trailer again right before I posted that, and I stopped the frame at the precise point where it starts yelling "I'm a Mass Effect game." It is clearly and decidedly before the N7 appears.

 

I only went JV in nitpicking though, so I'm out of my league. I respectfully bow out of this one.

[LinksOcarina]

People that like the synthesis cannot have high standards when it comes to specifically the science fiction genre - you REALLY can't think about the synthesis option, and it's plausibility in a world that's supposed to be a rational one, not pure fantasy world, and still like the ending. 

 

I have no doubt that there are many players out there who don't even consider such things as plausibility within a science fiction universe, but for those of us that do, the synthesis option was a slap in the face. 

 

How quaint...because a lot of science fiction and space opera titles delve into the metaphysiscs and "fantasy" of their medium all the time. Mass Effect gave you an option for it. What Mass Effect did is on the same level as Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica and Babylon 5 have done previously with science fiction; introduction of outside thematic elements with the sci-fi backdrop.

 

Thats not a new thing, and it has very little to do with standards. The likes of Orson Scott Card and even Issac Asimov have delved into this at times, with Enders Game and the Foundation books for example.

 

What you describe is personal preference, not a sci-fi "standard" because such distinctions are the same genre with different trappings. 

[medusa_hair]

I would say choosing Synthesis as an ending, and "liking" ME3's ending, are pretty close cousins to each other. Most people I've seen who favorite Synthesis over the others, ended up liking the ending as a whole.

 

I think this is because it's the ending that preserves all of your companions so people look on it as the most "happy" ending that they could get.  Personally, I am in the "destroy" camp.  

 

I really hope Andromeda makes absolutely no reference whatsoever to the previous games.  Time for  a fresh start so people can get over it already!

[Ahglock]

 

 

The entire point is not to continue Shepard's story but to show what a post-apocalyptic, post-Reaper invaded Milky Way was. A chance to show a darker side of Mass Effect, a chance to change the entire dynamic of the game setting, for example, by showing a Council struggling for legitimacy, a developing arms race in reaper technology recovery. In the same way ME2 was still within the same setting as ME1, but by moving out of Council space and to the frontier, it allowed for Bioware to tell a darker tale. As you uncover the new threat, you would move to the fringes of known space which opens up the exploration the new game wants to focus on. 

 

 

.

 

That sounds pretty awesome to me. 

 

I have no issues with Andromeda but if the story was good and the action was good the could canonize, go sideways in time, do a prequel, ret-con the endings, do a parallel universe where you played Shepard with a mustache and not enough people to noticeably affect their sales would care.

[Vaseldwa]

Frankly I am really happy it takes place in another galaxy. It gives them a chance for new races (possibly) and maybe new classes (again maybe). Also I don't really want to revisit the same planets and cities tbh, although I wouldn't complain.....much..... if that were the case. Also I am really looking forward to all new companions and enemies. I am looking forward  to "all new" and and tbh if they did put us in the same galaxy there would be people complaining about "biowares lack of imagination" or "lazy writing" although for different reasons. I am glad they are dumping the sand box and building a new castle (being metaphoric).  Looking Foreward to ME:A 

[KaiserShep]

Maybe, maybe not (depending on Catalyst BS levels) - but he did so at the expense of an entire sentient species (not including the Reapers). Destroy is the worst possible outcome, even including Refuse... you're emulating the Reapers.

 

To save life on Earth from the Holocene Extinction you have to kill all humans; if you were given that choice, would you take it?

 

I don't really see it as emulating the reapers myself, especially since you can factor in the very selfish reasoning of doing it partly for self preservation. I mean, if I was standing there, I wouldn't hesitate to avoid certain death for sake of robots, especially if their continued existence comes with the reapers as a package deal.

[Majestic Jazz]

We are in Andromeda not the Milky Way. Accept it. If you dont like it....then dont buy it.

[Gothfather]

/snip response to a seperate post

 

 

Incorrect. Complaining is much, much more effective than boycotting. Not buying doesn't tell the producer anything, so they simply lose money and do not know what they did wrong. Complaining on the other hand informs the producer what issues there are, and makes them more likely to attempt to cater to disgruntled customers since they have a notion of what can be done.

 

No actually the internet if FILLED with people QQing, complaining and ranting. This kind of BS QQing has zero effect on development because it is all based on ignorance. We don't know what Andromeda is as a game or it's story. We CAN NOT make any kind of INFORMED opinion on it because we have next to ZERO information. This is just gamer over inflated self importance. Giving our opinion of ME3 endings was important feedback but it is done and over. Complaining now has zero effect or importance because nothing you say is new information. Anything there were going to learn from player feedback on the ME3 endings is already been done. Anything they were not going to learn then they aren't going to learn now. QQing about them now wont change their position. It is over.

 

The only way a company changes direction is when sales slump, when we speak with our wallets. Granted when you are just QQing about BS a boycott will do nothing because you will NOT be representative of the opinions of others. So if you really can't handle Bioware's direction as a company and really feel your voice is representative of the majority of fans then DON'T BUY THEIR GAMES. You are not a developer you are not privy to any information to make informed opinions, all you have is supposition based on subjective desires which are not universal so why should Bioware think "oooo Dumner of Redoran doesn't like that ME:A is set in Andromeda. SO we are stopping production and gonna do what Dumner wants?" Maybe in your warped mind you are that important to the world but in reality there is no fraking reason for any developer to come to a game forum and get direction on what to do with their IP. The cult of the amateur doesn't actually bestow competence, education and experience in game DESIGN bestow competence.

[Gothfather]

Those appear around the same time as the N7 logo so my point still stands.

 

Okay from your subjective standpoint ME:A isn't a true Mass effect title. Fair enough if that is how you FEEL nothing will change that feeling. So don't buy the game. I saw the same things andfrom my subjective standpoint I identified it as Mass effect. And because this is all BS we have only one solution to the standstill because on the grand scheme of things neither of our subjective opinions trumps the other, do we buy or not buy? You are obviously already unhappy so you can say "Nope not buying a product i don't like," and now you can leave and come back a year from now. Check back in and see if anything has changed see with more information there is enough to warrant a buy. Your problem is solved.

 

For me. I have no idea if ME:A is worth a buy. So I am going to wait and see. Right now I don't have enough information to lean me in either direction.

[o Ventus]

No, they had plenty of other choices. They just decided not to use them and took the easy way out, throwing away the lore and practically everything else as they did so in most cases. Plus a lot of the team that worked on ME1-3, including the main people, are still on it. They just moved to a new studio. 

 

Dis. All of dis here.

[Dunmer of Redoran]

No actually the internet if FILLED with people QQing, complaining and ranting. This kind of BS QQing has zero effect on development because it is all based on ignorance. We don't know what Andromeda is as a game or it's story. We CAN NOT make any kind of INFORMED opinion on it because we have next to ZERO information. This is just gamer over inflated self importance. Giving our opinion of ME3 endings was important feedback but it is done and over. Complaining now has zero effect or importance because nothing you say is new information. Anything there were going to learn from player feedback on the ME3 endings is already been done. Anything they were not going to learn then they aren't going to learn now. QQing about them now wont change their position. It is over.

 

The only way a company changes direction is when sales slump, when we speak with our wallets. Granted when you are just QQing about BS a boycott will do nothing because you will NOT be representative of the opinions of others. So if you really can't handle Bioware's direction as a company and really feel your voice is representative of the majority of fans then DON'T BUY THEIR GAMES. You are not a developer you are not privy to any information to make informed opinions, all you have is supposition based on subjective desires which are not universal so why should Bioware think "oooo Dumner of Redoran doesn't like that ME:A is set in Andromeda. SO we are stopping production and gonna do what Dumner wants?" Maybe in your warped mind you are that important to the world but in reality there is no fraking reason for any developer to come to a game forum and get direction on what to do with their IP. The cult of the amateur doesn't actually bestow competence, education and experience in game DESIGN bestow competence.

 

What one person says? No, that doesn't matter much on its own. But if a large number of people are saying the same thing, or something roughly analogous from post to post? That matters a lot. Developers notice that, because they like to win over fans. Winning over fans means that they make more money and earn loyal customers. Many features from Bioware games (and you'll see this with games from other studios too) are drawn from fan feedback. That information does not need to be an angry, self-important rant. But even those offer something in the way of information to a dev team. And yes, that is still valuable to the dev team at this stage because the final game isn't complete. That doesn't mean Andromeda is suddenly going to be about Shepard and the Normandy team, but there might be a few references or missions relevant to characters or events from the main story. Less immediately, it could legitimately influence the intent of the developers to focus on making a game more closely related to the main series, or of the main series.

 

Simply choosing to stop purchasing products does not provide that sort of information to a developer. They know that they're making less money, but they don't know why they're making less money. They can make some assumptions, but unless they have feedback from fans, they have no evidence to use which they can base their decisions upon. "Speaking with your wallet" is fine as a suggested consequence of not being satisfied, but doing so without specifying why you'd be doing that does nothing to steer a company in the direction that you'd like to see it go in. A customer who may or may not buy future games and merchandise but is thoroughly interested in sticking with the developers and playing more games is far more valuable, no matter what they say, because there is a realistic chance they can be convinced to continue buying the games. Magnify this to a major concern echoed by many prospective customers, and working to win them over is far more enticing than working to win over people who don't buy the games and don't say anything.

[Mathias]

 

No, they had plenty of other choices. They just decided not to use them and took the easy way out, throwing away the lore and practically everything else as they did so in most cases. Plus a lot of the team that worked on ME1-3, including the main people, are still on it. They just moved to a new studio. 

 

 

Dis. All of dis here.

 

They had choice. Setting it in another galaxy was the right one. Canonizing an ending or retconing them was the wrong one. It bothers me that so many fans fault Bioware for doing the smart thing. Not the easy or lazy thing as they claim it is. By canonizing an ending to make a direct sequel, you're discrediting the other players who didn't choose that ending, and  also once again, giving us a middle finger in regards to choices. Wanting Bioware to canonize an ending, shows a complete lack of respect for one of the most important elements of Mass Effect games. An element people complained endlessly about when we found out most of our choices didn't matter in ME3.

 

And now people WANT them to continue to throw choice into the wind? By flat out retconing or canonizing the ending to the friggin trilogy? 

 

Also this notion that Mass Effect HAS to take place in the Milky Way to be considered a Mass Effect game, is the most foolish and close minded nonsense I've heard from the BSN in a while. There's no writ rule in storytelling that sequels need to take place in the same setting. It's about retaining those familiar elements and keeping the same identity. One of the most popular franchises, Final Fantasy, has been doing it for decades, and those games take place in entirely different universes. There are plenty of franchises out there that have been successful with this type of direction. 

 

It's things like this that's making me call these people out on the boards.