Why would they be? We let their planet burn for a planet that some Shepards weren't even from.
We don't let any planets burn. Even Thessia isn't destroyed at the end of the game.
Regardless of the plot of humanity asking other species to save Earth, why would Shepard wouldn't care if he's a spacer or colonist? we're talking about billions of humans. It's obvious Shepards would care.
I don't think the MW species went to Andromeda all together to then fight each other.
"You are exploring a new galaxy"
- I feel like the gameplay will be excellent. [AGREE / DISAGREE]
- I will feel like an explorer. [AGREE / DISAGREE]
- I will definitely love this game. [AGREE / DISAGREE]
I mean, how are you supposed to speculate this far based on such a broad and flimsy preface. There is no way anybody who actually has an education in market research would write a survey this way, as the answers to the questions will tell the business ALMOST NOTHING. The only way anybody would answer the question with such limited context is based off the equity from the existing ME franchise, and not off 3 single sentences of new information they were provided... thus, a useless survey.
I agree, but Mac Walters could've written this, judging by the quality, so it could easily be real.
Point in favor: humanity as the invaders has potential
Point in disfavor: I don't want to play as a soldier again.
What does it mean to be a soldier? Whether your specific backstory is that or you begin as some faceless accountant who proceeds to become a badazz soldier, in the end it is all the same. Besides it makes little sense that humanity would put the farmers or bureaucrats in charge of an expedition to gather resources and establish settlements in another galaxy.
That might be true, but only if the locals are a type 2+ or type 3 civilization.
And if they are, all that the refugees from MW can do is beg and explain that they will make for great pets.
Because any kind of military conflict between the survivors on the Ark and the locals will be very short...
Except this is a BioWare game... overcoming million to one odds happens nine times out of ten.
You mean Pocahontas / Ferngully?
I'm glad I'm not the only person in the world who thought Avatar was Fern Gully with Smurfs...
(and a lot of "borrowing" from Roger Dean)
I hope the big meanie aliens have a really good reason to be antagonistic towards us newcomers and aren't just a generic war like ******* race. I'd like to see us do something more than just accidentally invade their space. Perhaps we settle down on a nursery planet that they terra formed for their young ones and we accidentally kill their babies as we don't recognize them as sentient life. Communication problems and cultural clashes, like you mentioned, just aggravate our horrible mistake. Something like this gives the aliens very good reason for going to war with us and paints the aliens in a more sympathetic light.
I agree, we shouldn't be presented with a native alien species that attacks us for the evilolz, and thus painting us "Milkies" as blameless white knights completely freeing the player of any and all repercussions as we proceed to shoot hundreds of them in the face. On the other hand, the narrative shouldn't go to the other extreme and paint the natives as this quasi-mystic people that can do no wrong while we, the evil invaders, slaughter them for their land.
As many like to point out, the parallel between this (supposed) premise of Andromeda, and the colonization of the Americas is very obvious, but BioWare's writers really need to take a balanced approach to constructing their narrative here. Because, as we had in real life, there were angles and devils on both sides of the colonization efforts, and trying to completely whitewash one side over the other is only going to do the story a major dis-service.
I'm glad I'm not the only person in the world who thought Avatar was Fern Gully with Smurfs...
(and a lot of "borrowing" from Roger Dean)
Avatar was Fern Gully/Smurfs/Dances with Wolves, and it managed to be one of the very few science fiction settings to actually make me like the humans over the aliens. Normally, I find us to be rather "bleh" in such settings, but in Avatar, the whole "We are a noble, and perfect people" trope of the Na'Vi was so obnoxious that I was wishing that the humans would have pulled an Alien and Nuked the entire site from orbit.
I agree, we shouldn't be presented with a native alien species that attacks us for the evilolz, and thus painting us "Milkies" as blameless white knights completely freeing the player of any and all repercussions as we proceed to shoot hundreds of them in the face. On the other hand, the narrative shouldn't go to the other extreme and paint the natives as this quasi-mystic people that can do no wrong while we, the evil invaders, slaughter them for their land.
As many like to point out, the parallel between this (supposed) premise of Andromeda, and the colonization of the Americas is very obvious, but BioWare's writers really need to take a balanced approach to constructing their narrative here. Because, as we had in real life, there were angles and devils on both sides of the colonization efforts, and trying to completely whitewash one side over the other is only going to do the story a major dis-service.
Avatar was Fern Gully/Smurfs/Dances with Wolves, and it managed to be one of the very few science fiction settings to actually make me like the humans over the aliens. Normally, I find us to be rather "bleh" in such settings, but in Avatar, the whole "We are a noble, and perfect people" trope of the Na'Vi was so obnoxious that I was wishing that the humans would have pulled an Alien and Nuked the entire site from orbit.
Agree what we need in nuance. It's perfectly reasonable for natives to be possibly hostile to alien colonists or for misunderstandings to cause conflict. Equally its perfectly understandable for colonists to want to colonise.
Yeah Avatar was awful.
I'm glad I'm not the only person in the world who thought Avatar was Fern Gully with Smurfs...
(and a lot of "borrowing" from Roger Dean)
"Mass Effect: Andromeda takes players to the Andromeda galaxy, far beyond the Milky Way, where players will lead the fight for a new home in hostile territory - where WE are the aliens - opposed by a deadly indigenous race bent on stopping us.
This could be good news. Demonic hordes and robotic space cthulhu are okay once in a while, but the kind of conflict where both sides have valid points is much more interesting.
And what he means by "humans" he actually meant Europeans.So why wouldn't the native species to Andromeda be hostile to a species from the Milky Way invading their territory?
What gives humanity the right to set up a new homeworld there? And then, if successful, expand?
Manifest Destiny?
We would be upset at some invading "not from our galaxy" species.
Why not those from Andromeda?
And what he means by "humans" he actually meant Europeans.
Last time I looked at a map, China and India weren't in Europe.
While the Agent Smith speech is pretty cool, it's pretty scientifically inaccurate.
Any species will expand to an area, overpopulate and consume everything, and then move on provided that they have no natural predators and/or an ecosystem to balance out their growth potential. Everything from Elephants to ants will do this.
Any species will expand to an area, overpopulate and consume everything, and then move on provided that they have no natural predators and/or an ecosystem to balance out their growth potential. Everything from Elephants to ants will do this.
Hell, look at our own world history. The Romans did it, the English did it, the Spanish did it.
HOWEVER. I still stand by my case. I believe the leak does not confirm aggressive invasion. I believe it confirms that humanity is simply looking for a new home.
That's not true. Every animal and the indigenous people have a natural instinct to develop balance to their habitat and themselves with nature. You never heard or seen an animal or the indigenous people travel all the way to another continent or a nation to kill the inhabitants and take away resources.While the Agent Smith speech is pretty cool, it's pretty scientifically inaccurate.
Any species will expand to an area, overpopulate and consume everything, and then move on provided that they have no natural predators and/or an ecosystem to balance out their growth potential. Everything from Elephants to ants will do this.
That's not true. Every animal and the indigenous people have a natural instinct to develop balance to their habitat and themselves with nature. You never heard or seen an animal or the indigenous people travel all the way to another continent or a nation to kill the inhabitants and take away resources.
The indigenous people of Europe certainly never did any of that.
They definitely didn't repeatedly do it to most of what became North and South America.
I mean, it's not like the Spanish basically wiped out an entire civilization or anything. That would just be crazy talk.
That's not true. Every animal and the indigenous people have a natural instinct to develop balance to their habitat and themselves with nature. You never heard or seen an animal or the indigenous people travel all the way to another continent or a nation to kill the inhabitants and take away resources.
Sure you do. Any fauna, or flora introduced into an ecosystem with no natural predators or environmental limiters will proceed to over populate and destroy native species.
Look at things like Kudzu, Africanized Honeybees, the White Spotted Jellyfish, etc. Sure they don't have the capacity for speech or civilization like us humans do, but saying that anything "natural" is automatically in a state of equilibrium with itself is not true.
That's not true. Every animal and the indigenous people have a natural instinct to develop balance to their habitat and themselves with nature. You never heard or seen an animal or the indigenous people travel all the way to another continent or a nation to kill the inhabitants and take away resources.
They have and they did. Europeans came to nations outside of Europe to destroy and committed genocide the indigenous people and to take away that's theirs, their language, culture, spirituality, and their way of life and replace them of their own. If that's not true then why the U.S., England, and other European nations still invading colored countries? Why people of color practiced Western religion that wasn't even theirs? What happened to the original Native Americans who lived in America after the aftermath of European colonization?The indigenous people of Europe certainly never did any of that.
They definitely didn't repeatedly do it to most of what became North and South America.
I mean, it's not like the Spanish basically wiped out an entire civilization or anything. That would just be crazy talk.
They have and they did. Europeans came to nations outside of Europe to destroy and committed genocide the indigenous people and to take away that's theirs, their language, culture, spirituality, and their way of life and replace them of their own. If that's not true then why the U.S., England, and other European nations still invading colored countries? Why people of color practiced Western religion that wasn't even theirs? What happened to the original Native Americans who lived in America after the aftermath of European colonization?
They have and they did. Europeans came to nations outside of Europe to destroy and committed genocide the indigenous people and to take away that's theirs, their language, culture, spirituality, and their way of life and replace them of their own. If that's not true then why the U.S., England, and other European nations still invading colored countries? Why people of color practiced Western religion that wasn't even theirs? What happened to the original Native Americans who lived in America after the aftermath of European colonization?
My sarcasm aside, now I'm curious:
If you're aware of this, were you not being serious before or do you legitimately not think that the Europeans are indigenous people of Europe?
How is it false? You never heard of animals that have the capacity to destroy everything and polluting the planet to be inhabitable. Nature always have a way to keep and maintain the balance of life and the natural order and the indegionous people never commited global genocide but they do infight within themselves which caused their downfall in the first place.Did Cyonan's sarcasm go over your head?
He was pointing out that the Europeans who invaded the Americas were, in fact, indigenous people of Europe. So your statement that "You never heard or seen an animal or the indigenous people travel all the way to another continent or a nation to kill the inhabitants and take away resources" is false.
How is it false? You never heard of animals that have the capacity to destroy everything and polluting the planet to be inhabitable. Nature always have a way to keep and maintain the balance of life and the natural order and the indegionous people never commited global genocide but they do infight within themselves which caused their downfall in the first place.
you arent one of those "save the whales" nutjobs are you?
i have a very long list of people i hate but environmentalists are right on top.....
How is it false? You never heard of animals that have the capacity to destroy everything and polluting the planet to be inhabitable. Nature always have a way to keep and maintain the balance of life and the natural order and the indegionous people never commited global genocide but they do infight within themselves which caused their downfall in the first place.
I'll be sure to alert the government here that they don't have to worry about invasive species, because they're not a thing as nature will always maintain the balance of life.
How is it false? You never heard of animals that have the capacity to destroy everything and polluting the planet to be inhabitable. Nature always have a way to keep and maintain the balance of life and the natural order and the indegionous people never commited global genocide but they do infight within themselves which caused their downfall in the first place.
Nature does that kind of stuff all the time:
Earth’s early atmosphere contained only small amounts of free oxygen, probably produced entirely by the reaction of sunlight with water vapor from volcanoes. The oxygen-rich atmosphere that evolved later, and upon which oxygen-breathing life now depends, was a result of the origin of photosynthesis. During the Precambrian, vast numbers of single-celled algae and cyanobacteria living in the seas eventually released enough oxygen to transform the environment. The oldest evidence of cyanobacteria dates to 2.7 billion years ago, although oxygen did not begin to build up in the environment until about 2.3 billion years ago. During the transition from oxygen-poor to oxygen-rich atmosphere, the first banded iron formations may have formed.
Those single-celled algae and cyanobacteria polluted the atmosphere of early Earth enough to make it unlivable to the organisms that thrived in a low free oxygen environment.
you arent one of those "save the whales" nutjobs are you?
i have a very long list of people i hate but environmentalists are right on top.....
That's just because you haven't ran into the best sort of environmentalists!
Observe
Honestly this makes a lot of sense.
<.< It's context dependent though so...
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut