Well, I think if they're smart, they'll sidestep it entirely. The endings are so divergent that for any of them to have common ground, we'd need a timeskip so big that it might as well be a new galaxy entirely.
As for the first part, I don't think anything could irritate me more than the direction they took the story in ME2 or disappoint me more than the way they ended the story in ME3. So I choose optimism - and I'm actively willing to overlook a certain amount of implausibility if it means kicking off a game that I'll enjoy in full as much as I enjoyed ME1. And at this point, we don't even know how it's going to happen, so there's even less reason to be upset.
I really need to play Deus Ex. It's been burning a hole in my backlog for years at this point. People seem to like it.
I agree that they will probably just sidestep it. That's the main reason for the move to Andromeda.
Deus Ex was pretty cool. I was frustrated with the lack of non-lethal ammo, but I didn't know that the baton is apparently a non-lethal weapon, which would have made life way easier. There was one part which made me mad that I couldn't tell someone about something suspicious but I read that I was supposed to go talk to a different character for some reason.
Not really- it's still set-up of the setting (which is Andromedea itself).
Moreover, a deus ex machina is a plot mechanic. It has to be both unforeshadowed and resolve a plot problem- which has to be after the problem has been introduced and addressed. IE, into the plot. Getting to Andromedea is neither a plot problem (since it's already resolved), nor would introducing the means be unforeshadowed (both on the grounds of the technological feasibility being pre-established, and because it's simply backstory).
No more than what's already practiced. Reaper tech traveling from dark space was why the Reapers weren't simply a non-issue after ME1 in the first place, and Reaper tech being studied has been a things since ME1.
No because we aren't actually talking about Andromeda yet; we're talking about how we get there. Once inside, there is a lot the writers can do because their technology will presumably not be based on Reaper tech and they can easily be more advanced due to not resetting every 50,000 years. This allows the writers to invent almost any technology they want. They could easily write the races there to have super-fast FTL that doesn't need to discharge or can use that energy to power itself or whatever. Hey, maybe they will have a ship come from Andromeda to the Milky Way that will carry everything over. That could work, I suppose. They'd just need some reason for a ship to seek out life in the nearest neighboring galaxy.
As far a setting goes, Andromeda is to the Milky Way what Kirkwall is to Ferelden. It's just another country, and while you can establish it as having different culture and customs etc, something like Magic still works the same way there because they exist in the same universe.
Neither source is credible.
Being an admiral does not give him unfettered access to all black opps and what shadow funds they liberated when going rogue and if they are still backed by arts of the government. And that assumes he feels the need to let Shepard know all that he knows.
EDI has exactly the info the illusive man is willing to let the player get. She is potentially the most unreliable source available.
What we "knew" a rogue black opp group. Did that change, nope. Still that. What we didn't know but assumed. size, capabilities, funding, level of alliance backing. Did that change, yeah dramatically. But it was all assumptions based on shoddy information.
While I think a lot of what they did was lame. Letting the player know that intelligence can be unreliable makes the setting seem more real to me. So the info on Cerberus being wrong works for me. I just thought the new info was crap
Wow, you're really grasping at straws to toss this out. Kohoku had clearance enough to find out that Cerberus was an Alliance group to begin with. There's nothing in any of the games to indicate they are still being backed by the Alliance. Kohoku wants Shepard's help and has no motive for trying to hide anything from him. It's not like there's any indication that he was the one in charge of Cerberus and wanted to hide it. That actually would have been pretty cool. Vizire in Lair of the Shadow Broker says Cerberus killed him for asking questions. ME2 had Cerberus as a privately funded group. There is no discussion of being part of the Alliance ever at all. The closest thing is EDI saying it encouraged the Alliance to develop the Normandy with the Turians.
EDI has information TIM doesn't want Shepard to get. She can't tell you until she's unshackled. She then has access to all kinds of Cerberus data. The idea that what she can say is filtered by TIM at least makes sense, but part of her arc is her loyalty to Shepard and the crew of the Normandy more than Cerberus.
You're making up stuff to try and justify unexplained changes. That's not our job. The writers clearly took the idea of Cerberus and changed it into something else between games and didn't do the work to justify it. It wasn't some deep message to say intel was unreliable. You can interpret it that way, but you're just covering up bad writing.
Yeah, but you really shouldn't use DEM for something that isn't plot-related. Those distinctions are important too. Though we could just give up on the actual meaning and use DEM to mean, say, "any new development in the lore which the poster doesn't approve of," or something more specific if you can come up with rules.Nobody calls Star Trek transwarp conduits and wormholes DEMs, even though they didn't exist in the setting until they did.
In any event, how can term like "sudden" and "unexpected" apply to stuff that happens between games? We're not in the universe while this is happening, so sudden can't apply, and since we're not involved with the problem and attempts to solve it, it's silly to have expectations.
The journey is only not plot related if the story skips it and starts in Andromeda. How the characters get there is part of the plot, especially with the question not only being "how" but also "why". Your "change in definition" isn't what I'm doing and shows how little you understand what we're discussing here. I don't know Star Trek well enough to comment on it.
Those terms can apply because it is an established universe with established rules. Also, the fact that we aren't in the universe is exactly why a new technological development will be sudden and unexpected. Either it was being worked on and we didn't know or someone just stumbled upon it. Either way would be both sudden and unexpected and could be contrived. However, it could also be done well with some work.
But we already know some level of this tech exists, at least for the Reapers and perhaps for the collectors. So what is being rewritten as opposed to a few more details being revealed? It really seems to be more of a details revealed change to me than a complete rewrite. We have info that certain vessels can travel vast distances avoiding discharge problems and having at the very least a better fuel consumption system. The details on how far and how much better are just small details to be revealed.
We don't really know this level of tech exists. Going to the edge of the galaxy is a far cry from going to the next one. We also don't know that the Reapers don't make pitstops along the way. You're right that they could just say "wow the Reapers could actually go to other galaxies!" but that would be awfully convenient. Then again, there probably is no answer that isn't awfully convenient.
Retour en haut
