122 réponses à ce sujet

[Boost32]

Let us conquer the Helius Cluster, bring the natives to the heel and make them subservant species, if they refuse they will go extinct.
None should stay in the way of the Milky Way species!

[Mistic]

Except, (I suspect), we will not be in a position to impose humans, (& co), as the new master race(s) of Andromeda. Andromedans will be the ones with the superior technology and numbers; our saving grace is that we will be armed with that awesome secret weapon; the player’s character.

 

Let's hope it is that way, but I'm not so sure. Remember how humanity, thousands of years behind the other MW races (in both technology and population), was still considered strong enough to bully their way into the Council? How humans could get away with handpicking a new Council and take control of the Citadel? How Cerberus could get the upper hand against the most veteran intelligence services and underground organizations?

 

It's not the "let's go to Andromeda to find a new home" idea itself what makes me dubious, but Bioware's precedent regarding humanity's place in the galaxy. After all, even if it's for gameplay purposes only, they can't make the new aliens too advanced.

 

Or, if you prefer a more historically minded reference, we will be akin to the barbarian tribes that the Romans occasionally recruited as auxiliaries against the Persians. Pawns at worse or junior partners at best.

 

That's a good analogy. But don't forget the time the barbarians refugees became fed up and everything went to hell.

[vallore]

Let's hope it is that way, but I'm not so sure. Remember how humanity, thousands of years behind the other MW races (in both technology and population), was still considered strong enough to bully their way into the Council? How humans could get away with handpicking a new Council and take control of the Citadel? How Cerberus could get the upper hand against the most veteran intelligence services and underground organizations?

 

It's not the "let's go to Andromeda to find a new home" idea itself what makes me dubious, but Bioware's precedent regarding humanity's place in the galaxy. After all, even if it's for gameplay purposes only, they can't make the new aliens too advanced.

 

 

 

I simply don’t see Bioware making a game where we “lead” an invasion of space-tribes conquistadors, conquering and submitting xeno-natives just because we can. We can easily figure how well that would be received by some and I’m sure that they can see it too. Imo, they cannot afford another backlash, not after that ending…

 

Now sure, Humanity likely will be in the central stage, and the player’s character will be the especially special snowflake; that is to be expected. Many, (imo, likely most), people want to play the hero with the noble cause.

 

 

That's a good analogy. But don't forget the time the barbarians refugees became fed up and everything went to hell.

 

 

 

Interestingly, after Valens, the new emperor Theodosius got the gothic refugees, (Tervingi and Greuthungi), under control again, apparently without needing to win a single major battle at that.

 

Imo, it is interesting that this rebellion was caused by the corruption and ineptitude of local roman authorities, (specially one Lupicinus), not by an attempt of conquest by the goths.

 

Now actually, it would make a good story; local Andromedans authorities  letting the Milky Way refugees to starve, after allowing a black market to fleece them, (including taking some of them slaves in exchange of a few scraps of food for the others), and then inviting the refugee leadership for a banquet where they try to murder them. But of course, that game would be about a refugee rebellion against an oppressive and powerful state, and not about imperialistic conquistadors submitting native peoples.

 

Note: Edited for clarity

[Vortex13]

It would be nice to see a nuanced, morally grey approach to the whole affair. Maybe having a species like the Khet have legitimate reasons for being hostile apart from the copout methods of being stupid evil, or mind controlled slaves. I would like to see a narrative that is structured in a way that doesn't present the whole of humanity as glorious white knights, riding in to save the day.

 

 

Maybe something along the lines of the ARK forces blowing up an alien freighter that got too close for comfort, only to discover later that said transport was carrying unarmed civilians, and that the species we inadvertently attacked ( the Khet) have a reasonable motivation for declaring war on us. 

[Mistic]

I simply don’t see Bioware making a game where we “lead” an invasion of space-tribes conquistadors, conquering and submitting xeno-natives just because we can. We can easily figure how well that would be received by some and I’m sure that they can see it too. Imo, they cannot afford another backlash, not after that ending…

 

I don't see it either, but I can see Bioware missing the unfortunate implications.

 

After all, it's not as if the conquistadors and explorers of the past were the card carrying, mustache twirling villains that appear so often in pop cultural history nowadays. I mentioned Bernal Diaz's chronicle as a real and contemporary example of how they saw themselves: as a bunch of poor losers who couldn't make a decent living in the continent and wanted some gold and adventure, who were forced to go on even when most of them wanted to go back, who became fire-forged BFFs with several natives and defeated a tyrannical, imperialistic, idol-worshipping and human-sacrificing empire, only for the higer-ups to take the credit of all their hard work.

 

Sounds like your typical action or RPG story, and it was true, up to a point. But a narrow point of view doesn't take all of the implications into consideration. That could happen to ME:A, as it happened in ME1-3: by focusing too much on how humans view their place in the galaxy, other points of view are swept under the rug or left for token moments.

 

Now actually, it would make a good story; local Andromedans authorities  letting the Milky Way refugees to starve, after allowing a black market to fleece them, (including taking some of them slaves in exchange of a few scraps of food for the others), and then inviting the refugee leadership for a banquet where they try to murder them. But of course, that game would be about a refugee rebellion against an oppressive and powerful state, and not about imperialistic conquistadors submitting native peoples.

 

Oh, yes, indeed, it could make for a great story. Real life writes good plots. Problem is, there's another unfortunate implication here: although the Goths were mistreated, their response was the first step in the crumbling of the Classical Roman Empire, whose destruction is generally considered a bad thing. Barbarian tribes were more than eager to carve their own kingdoms in former Roman territories, after all.

[Vortex13]

You know what would be a nice turn around on expected tropes for a BioWare title, is if the 'good' natives that end up helping the Milky Way refugees aren't the good looking/sexually appealing aliens, but rather the weird/non-humanoid ones.

 

The Good Guys:

 

The Bad Guys:

 

 

 

The space elves/fairies over there are actually the horrible villains of the story, and the fungoid species that look like a polyp with tentacles are the good guys. It would certainly make for an interesting twist considering BioWare's standard MO when it comes to these types of things; you know the whole: Good = Beautiful trope.

[vallore]

I don't see it either, but I can see Bioware missing the unfortunate implications.

 

After all, it's not as if the conquistadors and explorers of the past were the card carrying, mustache twirling villains that appear so often in pop cultural history nowadays. I mentioned Bernal Diaz's chronicle as a real and contemporary example of how they saw themselves: as a bunch of poor losers who couldn't make a decent living in the continent and wanted some gold and adventure, who were forced to go on even when most of them wanted to go back, who became fire-forged BFFs with several natives and defeated a tyrannical, imperialistic, idol-worshipping and human-sacrificing empire, only for the higer-ups to take the credit of all their hard work.

 

Sounds like your typical action or RPG story, and it was true, up to a point. But a narrow point of view doesn't take all of the implications into consideration. That could happen to ME:A, as it happened in ME1-3: by focusing too much on how humans view their place in the galaxy, other points of view are swept under the rug or left for token moments.

 

 

I wouldn’t be overmuch worried. Remember that we are speaking of the main plot, and they are likely working on it by several years now. I can see them not realizing the implications of a secondary plot until the game is out, but not the main one.

 

Now here’s a point I feel the conquistador analogy fails; space is not like the Americas; I suspect we will be settling primarily in empty planets, (that is, not colonized by an intelligent species). That is, we will not be wrestling occupied land and subduing local peoples.  It would rather be as if Colombus reached the Caribbean islands only to find most of them empty.  

 

Now, if in Andromeda a nearby civilization is hostile towards our efforts, and wants to kick us out, forcing us to oppose them, so what?

 

That doesn’t make it imperialism; let’s face it, they don’t have a particular right to those planets either, certainly not just because they were originated in the same galaxy. The truth is; they are as alien to these unsettled planets as we are. Or, if you want an analogy of the Age of Sail, instead of playing conquistadors it would be more like two naval powers entering in conflict over an uninhabited archipelago.

 

Oh, yes, indeed, it could make for a great story. Real life writes good plots. Problem is, there's another unfortunate implication here: although the Goths were mistreated, their response was the first step in the crumbling of the Classical Roman Empire, whose destruction is generally considered a bad thing. Barbarian tribes were more than eager to carve their own kingdoms in former Roman territories, after all.

 

Well, yes and no. The gothic rebellion, per se, would never have caused it; it only became a relevant factor because of the deluge of other barbarian tribes that overwhelmed the Roman Empire a few years later. And that is part of my point; it is very unlikely we will have the numbers (or tech), to cause the fall of a (evil) andromedan empire by ourselves:

 

If we use the barbarian invasions as an analogy, we would need not only the goths, (as the Milky Way refugees), but many other barbarian tribes, (that would need to be local).  But if that occurs, that would make the conflict a mostly local one.

 

As an aside, the art and the names released, (if true), are a bit suggestive of what we may expect; one showed a Rivendell like habitation, (of the Remnants, possibly), the other looked akin to Mordor, (suggesting the evil guys home turf?).  While the name “remnant” itself, imo, suggests that the Remnants were the original (benign)  power of the area and were possibly defeated by an (evil) invading “empire,” (hence they are now a Remnant of their former state).  

 

If so, we would likely be trying to ally with the Remnants, (the closest thing to natives), against another, much nastier power, possibly even originally from another area of Andromeda.

[vallore]

You know what would be a nice turn around on expected tropes for a BioWare title, is if the 'good' natives that end up helping the Milky Way refugees aren't the good looking/sexually appealing aliens, but rather the weird/non-humanoid ones.

 

 

 

 

The space elves/fairies over there are actually the horrible villains of the story, and the fungoid species that look like a polyp with tentacles are the good guys. It would certainly make for an interesting twist considering BioWare's standard MO when it comes to these types of things; you know the whole: Good = Beautiful trope.

 

So, you mean Dark Eldar?

 

 

But then I suspect a lot of players would  want Bioware to make a game where you get to play the bad guys...

[BaaBaaBlacksheep]

This thread reminds of me what George Carlin said.

[JoltDealer]

I agree about history and I'm afraid humanity is still not learning from its mistakes. We have an great capacity to forget everything or to not care at all about the past after few years... (I've heard some young people who think WW2 never existed and that it was just a "story to scare people", can you believe that ?).

 

I do understand where you're going with "the option should exist". I never said it shouldn't, I just wrote that if the game is only about killing/enslave everybody because humanity's domination is so cool (like some BSNers suggested it on this thread - not entirely sure they are all serious though), I personally don't want to play it.

What I would like to have is a good balance between peace and war on the main story and to be able to tip the scales in favor of our favourite side - peace and diplomacy in my case... and I hope the Paragon/renegade system will be good so our actions will have really important consequences. I also really want to avoid the evil-bloody-brainless-alien cliché that attack us without any reasons (so we have a clear conscience to strike back... too easy to turn the story that way)

 

Well to use history as an example, the past has shown that total domination and cooperation have their benefits in their own given timeframes.  Wiping out those that don't wish to acknowledge your rule or claim, in the short term at least, is beneficial in the respect that it lessens the amount of potential threats and it means that you don't have to share resources.  Approaching it diplomatically is better morally, but resources would be shared and expansion would be limited.  Not to mention, our inclination towards diplomacy may not always be shared by the natives.

 

I think varying degrees of diplomacy and war would make for some very interesting Paragon and Renegade options.  Too soft and your people will be seen as spineless, and therefore vulnerable to attack from natives who wish to remove the outsiders.  Too hard and you will be left with no intel on the planet that you wish to inhabit.  With games like Undertale really challenging the gaming norm of, "shoot first, ask questions later," the more options that we have to play with the better.

 

Although I am no fan of total bloodshed, there are going to be fans that would want that.  While it is incredibly un-heroic, depending on the circumstances, it could be seen as necessary.  The option definitely needs to exist.

[Mistic]

Now here’s a point I feel the conquistador analogy fails; space is not like the Americas; I suspect we will be settling primarily in empty planets, (that is, not colonized by an intelligent species). That is, we will not be wrestling occupied land and subduing local peoples.  It would rather be as if Colombus reached the Caribbean islands only to find most of them empty.  

 

Now, if in Andromeda a nearby civilization is hostile towards our efforts, and wants to kick us out, forcing us to oppose them, so what?

 

That doesn’t make it imperialism; let’s face it, they don’t have a particular right to those planets either, certainly not just because they were originated in the same galaxy. The truth is; they are as alien to these unsettled planets as we are. Or, if you want an analogy of the Age of Sail, instead of playing conquistadors it would be more like two naval powers entering in conflict over an uninhabited archipelago.

 

I don't know. The concept of terra nullius is tricky and has been used in the past to support claims based on different uses of the land. For example, the typical claim by settlers that nomadic groups couldn't really claim ownership of a certain territory because they didn't live permanently there and didn't grow crops (this time it's not Columbus in the Caribbean, but the British in Australia).

 

In Mass Effect terms, we know that a planet being settled or not is not enough when talking about sovereignty. In Council space, garden planets are a serious no-no, entire regions can be under the influence of a galactic power without having settlements in them and colonization rights have to be negotiated. It was because of a problem with those rules that the Batarians left and became humanity's enemies. So are we to become the Batarians now? If addressed, it would be a great source of irony (now imagining a Batarian squadmate or NPC pointing it out...).

 

By the way, naval powers in conflict over an uninhabited archipielago? We don't have to go the Age of Sail for that.

[Dean_the_Young]

I don't know. The concept of terra nullius is tricky and has been used in the past to support claims based on different uses of the land. For example, the typical claim by settlers that nomadic groups couldn't really claim ownership of a certain territory because they didn't live permanently there and didn't grow crops (this time it's not Columbus in the Caribbean, but the British in Australia).

 

In Mass Effect terms, we know that a planet being settled or not is not enough when talking about sovereignty. In Council space, garden planets are a serious no-no, entire regions can be under the influence of a galactic power without having settlements in them and colonization rights have to be negotiated. It was because of a problem with those rules that the Batarians left and became humanity's enemies. So are we to become the Batarians now? If addressed, it would be a great source of irony (now imagining a Batarian squadmate or NPC pointing it out...).

 

By the way, naval powers in conflict over an uninhabited archipielago? We don't have to go the Age of Sail for that.

 

I expect that the colonization conflicts will be having will mostly be on those scarcely settled or only tentatively claimed planets. Think of the ME3 map sector of 'human space'- 99% of the stars of the galaxy hadn't even been visited, but humanity claimed an entire sector, and in some of those worlds all it had was an outpost of a few dozen.

 

I suspect that the 'hostile' species we see will be the more of the 'our arbitrary space map we haven't explored ourselves yet', with the Arc being more of a 'you ain't settled it, so we're claiming it.' With some conflicted claims of token settlements, or a colony that was a token at the time of Arc arrival being escalated into a full colonization project just to deny it.

 

But yeah. Given the number of garden worlds even in ME without civilizations, it's probably not going to be a lack of empty rocks to settle that will cause conflict, but expansive claims on the part of the Andromedeans.

[Catastrophy]

Actually "Invasion" is a term meant to describe the mechanic of players taking over control of AI characters in the SP campaign. It will, of course, be reworded to a much less offensive term with more emphasis on playing together at increased challenge level.

[Sartoz]

 

Snip

After all, even if it's for gameplay purposes only, they can't make the new aliens too advanced.

 

                                                                                      <<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>

 

Ahh... but that could be an excellent plot device. The indigenous races of the Helius cluster have the numbers and just enough tech to keep us at bay. If Andromeda is 1 of 3 games, then at the end of the first one, humanity just won a respite from the relentless attacks from the Khet.... to be followed by games 2 and 3.

 

Game 2 would have humanity entrenched and expand its base in the cluster and its influence with the locals. Then defeat the Khet once and for all and to prepare for a rumoured more powerful empire from the Rim.

 

Game 3 would have humanity plus the Salarians, Asaris and Krogans colonies join forces to defend itself against an inimical and powerful enemy from the edges of the cluster.

 

[vallore]

I don't know. The concept of terra nullius is tricky and has been used in the past to support claims based on different uses of the land. For example, the typical claim by settlers that nomadic groups couldn't really claim ownership of a certain territory because they didn't live permanently there and didn't grow crops (this time it's not Columbus in the Caribbean, but the British in Australia).

 

Different situation; nomadic peoples may not built permanent abodes, but almost always roam a specific territories in a (mostly) regular migration pattern, following their herds foraging needs, or game migration patterns. In that sense, they indeed own a territory, (and have conflicts over it). Such territories are vital for the subsistence of such a culture.

 

However, that is not the case I was speaking of; we are speaking of territories specifically not inhabited, either by sedentary or nomadic cultures. In any conflict over such a territory, you do not get a situation that can translate in a native vs colonist conflict. Rather, you get a conflict between two groups of (potential) settlers over a new, unsettled land.

 

 

 

 

In Mass Effect terms, we know that a planet being settled or not is not enough when talking about sovereignty. In Council space, garden planets are a serious no-no, entire regions can be under the influence of a galactic power without having settlements in them and colonization rights have to be negotiated. It was because of a problem with those rules that the Batarians left and became humanity's enemies. So are we to become the Batarians now? If addressed, it would be a great source of irony (now imagining a Batarian squadmate or NPC pointing it out...).

 

Well, if I remember it correctly, the Batarians wanted the Council to give them exclusive colonizing rights over an area of the galaxy, (therefore excluding Humans and others from it). The Council refused; therefore Humans continued to create new colonies on unsettled worlds of that area, to the Batarians chagrin. Personally, I see it mostly as a conflict between two “colonial” powers.

 

 

Now such scenario depends on the existence of a Central Authority, recognized by virtually (almost) all sentient species of the area as legitimate. Of course, we would need a well settled, Andromedan community already in existence in the area for that. Now if Bioware did go that way, we probably wouldn’t really have a chance to win a conflict over unsettled worlds against the combined might of the major local powers, so I suspect we can safely assume that won’t be the case. Otherwise we would be stuck playing the role of diplomats, navigating the endless corridors of a bureaucratic maze...

[Shechinah]

Well, if I remember it correctly, the Batarians wanted the Council to give them exclusive colonizing rights over an area of the galaxy, (therefore excluding Humans and others from it). The Council refused; therefore Humans continued to create new colonies on unsettled worlds of that area, to the Batarians chagrin. Personally, I see it mostly as a conflict between two “colonial” powers.

"Despite being welcomed into the galactic community, batarian aggression provoked several crises in galactic relations over the years. Sometime around 1785 CE, a batarian fleet bombarded the salarian colony world of Mannovai; in 1913, the Batarian Hegemony annexed the independent asari colony of Esan; and in 2115, Citadel forces skirmished with batarian forces on the planet Enael.

In the early 2160s, humans began to colonize the Skyllian Verge, a region the batarians were already actively settling. The batarians asked the Citadel Council to intervene and declare the Verge an area of "batarian interest". When the Council refused, the batarians closed their Citadel embassy and severed diplomatic and economic relations, becoming an inward-looking rogue state." - Mass Effect Wikipedia

[Mistic]

Different situation; nomadic peoples may not built permanent abodes, but almost always roam a specific territories in a (mostly) regular migration pattern, following their herds foraging needs, or game migration patterns. In that sense, they indeed own a territory, (and have conflicts over it). Such territories are vital for the subsistence of such a culture.

 

It's the same claim those space powers could make. As Dean pointed out, we could face scenarios (already seen in ME) where a power may have a token presence in a given region. Military posts, research labs, ship patrols, etc. They could claim that it's enough to ask for ownership and that the resources of those territories are vital for them too. Asking them to leave some planets for the newcomers is the same as asking nomads to leave several lands for the settlers. They have lots of them, and they barely use them, why can't they share?

 

At best, it's a repeat of the Alliance-Batarian problem. Just that now humans don't have a permit signed by the galactic authority to support their claims.

 

"Despite being welcomed into the galactic community, batarian aggression provoked several crises in galactic relations over the years. Sometime around 1785 CE, a batarian fleet bombarded the salarian colony world of Mannovai; in 1913, the Batarian Hegemony annexed the independent asari colony of Esan; and in 2115, Citadel forces skirmished with batarian forces on the planet Enael.

In the early 2160s, humans began to colonize the Skyllian Verge, a region the batarians were already actively settling. The batarians asked the Citadel Council to intervene and declare the Verge an area of "batarian interest". When the Council refused, the batarians closed their Citadel embassy and severed diplomatic and economic relations, becoming an inward-looking rogue state." - Mass Effect Wikipedia

 

That explains why the Council was happy enough to give permission to the Alliance. It seems the Batarian Hegemony has never been a good neighbour.

[Shechinah]

That explains why the Council was happy enough to give permission to the Alliance. It seems the Batarian Hegemony has never been a good neighbour.

 

S'funny, I find that the way some people want humanity to act is quite a lot like the way the batarians act and with the same attitude.
 

[KaiAdamori]

Bioware doesn't have as many balls as a Krogan to make a villainous invasion scenario as the main campaign where you are the bad guy. At most, you are pretty aggressive, and the hostile aliens are somehow evil and you may be freeing the natives from them. 

If only!

 

 

Willing to bet a lot of money that getting our foot in the Andromedan community's door will involve:

 

• Allying with one or more benevolent underdog races against a more malevolent and supremely powerful foe (Khet?).
  • This will mean that the player gets to fight for a 'righteous cause' (the underdog race might have been annihilated had we not shown up).
     
  • Despite the fact that we'll still be massacring an indigenous species (and potentially stealing their territory), Bioware will allay players' white/colonial guilt by having us save another, more sympathetic species from subjugation or extinction.
     
  • High probability of both the Humans (or Milky Wayers) are Warriors and Diplomats tropes coming into play.
     
  • Of course, the Khet's motivations might be more convoluted than they first appear.
    • Perhaps, like ME1's Geth, they're operating on orders from a higher, mysterious power that will become more prominent in future titles.
       
    • Bioware might even throw in a twist, such as the Khet having an ulterior (maybe even reasonable) motive for their aggression.

 

• Exploring solar systems to find habitable planets for each participating Milky Way race (maybe even deciding whether to conquer or barter for claimed/occupied ones).
  OR
  Protecting and expanding previously-established colonies from Khet retaliation.
  • The leak about a Krogan colony ship makes me think it'll be the former, although it might have referred to a ship that departed a Krogan colony.
     
  • The "Remnant" will have engineered some intragalactic fast-transit system analogous to the relays in the original trilogy.
     
  • There'll also be technological incentives, such as finding Remnant tech to help defeat the Khet (or whoever).

 

 

I think this is the most likely scenario

 

The Emperor said it best: "No world shall be beyond my rule, no enemy shall be beyond my wrath." 

 

Bioware would never take the chance. Understandably. They are too big a name and have too much to loose from consumer and public backlash.

 

I'm not sure about it. My first contact with space opera was Star Wars, where the human-only imperials were akin to Space Nazis and the heroic rebels were far more alien-friendly. If we're talking about a setting with a real Earth, my second contact with space opera was Star Trek, yet another case in which humans working alongside aliens and considering them equals is a positive trait.

 

In fact, the first ME was more nuanced in that regard. One of the common themes was the dilemma between the "humans first" mentality and the "we are part of a bigger society" one, from simple dialogue choices for Shepard to big choices like the Council's fate. It was possible for Shepard to go full manifest destiny or play the Star Trek captain. Which made sense, since the series is an homage to many sci-fi stories.

 

But from ME2 onwards that nuance was lost by the setting itself. Suddenly Space Nazis are not so bad, Reapers are yandere for humanity, our genetics are awesome, Earth is the most important planet in the galaxy, etc. I fear ME:A can follow ME2's path instead of ME's.

 

I'm not so sure Star trek was so peace and love. Gene Rodenberry certainly wanted to create an idealised version of humanity, that used diplomacy and co-operation to solve its problems. The thing is, as the various series went on it slowly became a humanocentric superiority theme. The Humans and our federation where always right, it was the beligerant and untrustworthy aliens that the humans had to "educate" on the "right" way of doing things (read; our way)

 

 

Personally, considering what little came out, (including the art we’ve seen thus far), I’m  inclined to believe it will be something like this:

 

We reach Andromeda and find an ongoing conflict between a species, (or group of species), of highly advanced Andromedans, (the Remnant?), against another species of (evil) highly advanced Andromedans, (the Keth?); then we are attacked by that evil empire ™ and have to try to join forces with the “good guys,” that may be more or less reluctant about us.

 

No imperialism, no invasion, we just fall into a local conflict and have to get local allies and other means of survival, (sounds familiar?).

I think this is most likely to be the case. Has some potential but it doesn't really bring anything we haven't seen before.

[vallore]

"Despite being welcomed into the galactic community, batarian aggression provoked several crises in galactic relations over the years. Sometime around 1785 CE, a batarian fleet bombarded the salarian colony world of Mannovai; in 1913, the Batarian Hegemony annexed the independent asari colony of Esan; and in 2115, Citadel forces skirmished with batarian forces on the planet Enael.

In the early 2160s, humans began to colonize the Skyllian Verge, a region the batarians were already actively settling. The batarians asked the Citadel Council to intervene and declare the Verge an area of "batarian interest". When the Council refused, the batarians closed their Citadel embassy and severed diplomatic and economic relations, becoming an inward-looking rogue state." - Mass Effect Wikipedia

 

Ah, thanks Shechinah! I remembered the second part somewhat, but not the first.

[vallore]

It's the same claim those space powers could make. As Dean pointed out, we could face scenarios (already seen in ME) where a power may have a token presence in a given region. Military posts, research labs, ship patrols, etc. They could claim that it's enough to ask for ownership and that the resources of those territories are vital for them too. Asking them to leave some planets for the newcomers is the same as asking nomads to leave several lands for the settlers. They have lots of them, and they barely use them, why can't they share?

 

At best, it's a repeat of the Alliance-Batarian problem. Just that now humans don't have a permit signed by the galactic authority to support their claims.

 

 

 

 Well personally, I would be perfectly comfortable with the nature of such a conflict in a game, as it would be a struggle between colonial powers over empty land, not an invasion and subjugation of a native nation.  Now, they certainly could claim an area of unsettled space for themselves, but I wouldn’t recognize them a special legitimacy about such a claim over “ours.”

 

 If anything, I would point that rather than nomads claiming an area they don’t inhabit, such a scenario suggests a variation of “them” as being more akin to a 19^th century colonial power, carving an area of the galaxy map for themselves; area they don’t effectively control and may have not even have visited.

 

 

At best, it's a repeat of the Alliance-Batarian problem. Just that now humans don't have a permit signed by the galactic authority to support their claims.

 

 

 

I would expect us to find some local aid to balance that.

[rocklikeafool]

A potential leak in the form of a Mass Effect Andromeda survey was released.  It can be found at this link:  http://www.eurogamer...ng-survey-leaks.  With humanity -- or just the Milky Way species -- being the invaders this time around, it raises some interesting questions.  Will we be the invaders who try to co-exist, or will we go all "British Empire" and annihilate the natives?  What would you try to do?

Why not allow options for both? A renegade PC would probably not give a crap about the natives former lifestyle.

[Dean_the_Young]

 Well personally, I would be perfectly comfortable with the nature of such a conflict in a game, as it would be a struggle between colonial powers over empty land, not an invasion and subjugation of a native nation.  Now, they certainly could claim an area of unsettled space for themselves, but I wouldn’t recognize them a special legitimacy about such a claim over “ours.”

 

 If anything, I would point that rather than nomads claiming an area they don’t inhabit, such a scenario suggests a variation of “them” as being more akin to a 19^th century colonial power, carving an area of the galaxy map for themselves; area they don’t effectively control and may have not even have visited.

 

 

I think you said it earlier, but such a conflict would be a colonizer-versus-colonizer conflict rather than colonizer-versus-natives.

 

Now, I can definitely see the nativist card being played- 'you Milky Wayians are the foreigners'- but past rhetoric (which is totally worth buying into or exploring), that's just a distinction without a difference. All interstellar colonists are colonizing powers- being from another galaxy doesn't make it any more 'alien' to the system being claimed and settled.

 

Though I would certainly like to see dialogue options to buy into that sort of idea- especially paragonism. It's the sort of deference to alien claims of authority and jurisdiction that marked ME1's paragon politics, and it'd be a good intellectual weak point to have for Renegadism to foil against.

 

 

(Personal prediction- Paragonism will include deffering to other species claims and trying to negotiate a solution or find unclaimed areas, while Renegadism will be more assertive and disregard weak claims as posturing.)

 

 

I would expect us to find some local aid to balance that.

 

 

 

What do you want to bet that a sympathetic alien faction's offer of support and colonizing rights is a ploy to get the Arc entangled in Andromedean disputes by making the MW's a proxy/buffer party?

[Mistic]

Now, I can definitely see the nativist card being played- 'you Milky Wayians are the foreigners'- but past rhetoric (which is totally worth buying into or exploring), that's just a distinction without a difference. All interstellar colonists are colonizing powers- being from another galaxy doesn't make it any more 'alien' to the system being claimed and settled.

 

Though I would certainly like to see dialogue options to buy into that sort of idea- especially paragonism. It's the sort of deference to alien claims of authority and jurisdiction that marked ME1's paragon politics, and it'd be a good intellectual weak point to have for Renegadism to foil against.

 

That only works as long as there isn't a galactic government body with legal enforcement of such claims. After all, without going to the tricky humans-are-from-Africa-therefore-everyone-else-is-a-colonizer part, humans don't (normally) live on water or in the air, yet states tend to be very protective of their territorial waters and air space.

 

The alleged "weak point" is entertaining from an intellectual point of view, but in practice it's a matter of diplomacy and pragmatism. Apart from the aforementioned water and air cases, there are international rules for unclaimed lands too (like Antarctica). Not respecting other people's claims will mean they won't feel under any obligation to respect yours.

 

Imagine if the scenario was the opposite: a bunch of refugees from Andromeda try to find unclaimed worlds in Council space. Wait, we don't need to go to Andromeda for that. The Quarians faced a similar predicament in Ekuna. They settled illegally and the Council threatened with bombarding them if they didn't leave. 

 

That said, it's most likely that we will end up in the Andromedan equivalent of the Terminus Systems.

 

What do you want to bet that a sympathetic alien faction's offer of support and colonizing rights is a ploy to get the Arc entangled in Andromedean disputes by making the MW's a proxy/buffer party?

 

It would make sense, wouldn't it? Paragons would feel nice, renegades would feel strong, everyone happy! Until we discover that the ones who sold us the colonization rights weren't the right claimants to begin with...

[Khrystyn]

Comment removed