I think sexier images sell, can you imagine? Ashley in her undergarments lashed to a rock lava filled Mars like plane, awaiting certain death by Thresher Maw, only to have Shepard Antonious Publius come to her daring rescue!
Someone needs to do a mock up of the Prince of Persia cover with ME to be honest.
Perseus and Andromeda... all over again. 
It is. But to be fair it is also a part of why continuing the series as a "Mass Effect" game makes little sense.
yes BG2 is a Baldur's Gate game "in name only" But it is still a Forgotten Realms game. It doesn't take magic which doesn't technically exist in the setting to get to Amn. Heck, southern zones like Nashkel and its mines are already in northern Amn. You can walk from Baldur's Gate to Athkatla if you wanted to!
Andromeda is different in that there is no known way to reach there. As demonstrated by it being far enough away for RGB to not matter (nevermind that the relay network is not in every system in the MW but oh well)
Sometimes how you feel about the game just isn't very relevant to the specific topic. Liking ME doesn't mean that you have to think ME science was any good.Ok, so, same as AlanC9. But anyway, I would have no way of knowing one way or another, what you or any other person thinks necessarily, I just saw a lot of negativity and found it puzzling, considering you know this is the forum for those very games and all that.
Sometimes how you feel about the game just isn't very relevant to the specific topic. Liking ME doesn't mean that you have to think ME science was any good.
I don't care about humans being special either. Or Shepard being special especially. That's whack.
But I did want them to be competitive... and enforce their special-ness. Entirely different thing. Driven by actions, not inherent qualities. 
So you're conceding that the "not really the ME setting" argument has failed, and we're back to you not liking how the ME setting is going to incorporate travel to Andromeda. Well, I guess that's progress. I'll just toss a like at In Exile's response above and move on.
Did I fall asleep at the keyboard and forget to type "part of"? No, I must not have, because you quoted me.
I'd be pretty p*ssed if BG2 was suddenly set on Krynn with no explanation or a supremely lame one. That would be far ore "Baldur's Gate in Name Only" than moving a few miles further south along the coast.
I would think this will feel like *some* of Mass Effect.
Especially the stupid open worlds in ME1 and the Mako. Which for some reason people have gotten in their minds was actually fun. It was crap. I have to wonder if they live in a bubble and barely play any other games. Even the Hammerhead had some gameplay value to it. It was at least kind of arcade like.
I might like this more for new things...not for being like old Mass Effect. Like the possibility that the Expedition is more science based. Maybe I'll get to play a quirky researcher type this time.
I would think this will feel like *some* of Mass Effect.
Especially the stupid open worlds in ME1 and the Mako. Which for some reason people have gotten in their minds was actually fun. It was crap. I have to wonder if they live in a bubble and barely play any other games. Even the Hammerhead had some gameplay value to it. It was at least kind of arcade like.
I might like this more for new things...not for being like old Mass Effect. Like the possibility that the Expedition is more science based. Maybe I'll get to play a quirky researcher type this time.
The "open worlds" aspect is pretty much the one thing the early descriptions have going for it. Assuming they took the feedback from DAI to heart (more Frostback basin, less Emerald Graves)
If that is done well, and has a strong narrative and isn't just Shooter #9999. it could theoretically be a decent game, if not a Mass Effect game.
Open worlds suck without the handcrafted detail and narratives you can tell just with the environment. It's something Bethesda is good at (and takes their sweet time on), but Bioware sucks at. It also sucks in squad games, period.
Sometimes how you feel about the game just isn't very relevant to the specific topic. Liking ME doesn't mean that you have to think ME science was any good.
And sometimes...
YOU JUST GOTTA DANCE
Ahem, whatever my earlier points were regarding the topic itself, I re-affirm them.
For me a hard Reboot would be welcomed. The Reapers were interesting but were too heavily relied on for antagonists. I was hoping for a Rendezvue with Rama or Childhood's End story but they ended up as generic space villains with a sloppy justification at the end. The trilogy also rushed through major events that should have been their own games. Too much focused on Shepard. He was made into a competent hero by making everyone else unnaturally incompetent. Main characters should have changed between games. Why make Shepard a pawn of Cerberus when you could start as someone already aligned with Cerberus for various reasons? Habitable planets are likely to have a range of environments. Making a planet for each environment is a waste of development and reduces the ability to tie everything together. A reboot would allow better development of cultures, characters, and events.
Did I fall asleep at the keyboard and forget to type "part of"? No, I must not have, because you quoted me.
I'd be pretty p*ssed if BG2 was suddenly set on Krynn with no explanation or a supremely lame one. That would be far ore "Baldur's Gate in Name Only" than moving a few miles further south along the coast.
It's pretty much the same thing. See your Palaven example earlier in the thread; it means absolutely nothing that we could have gone to Palaven in some alternate universe - because we didn't go to Palaven in ME1.
The relative distance is irrelevant in this case. Baldur's Gate 2 doesn't build off any of Baldur's Gate's setting or plot in any relevant capacity; it is a spin-off, it uses a couple base elements from Baldur's Gate (Bhaalspawn soul, retconned characters, etc) as a jumping off point to tell its own completely independent story, which is exactly what Andromeda is doing. Quite simply, this is what spin-offs do.
Philosophical question: what good is setting the game only a few miles south of Baldur's Gate, if all we get are a few token references? This is what I'm talking about: what did Baldur's Gate 2 do, with respect to the original BG, that Andromeda can't do with respect to the original trilogy? I could set a game that takes place entirely inside the spider basement in Beregost which is located right in the heart of BG1. I don't think I'd get people applauding me for keeping the setting and integrity of Baldur's Gate intact in that instance.
Palaven would've been cool in ME3 actually. I almost suspect it was slightly planned. They at least had some stories to fit there. Jack and her kids are there, Grunt is there, Garrus' dad is there, and Kal'Reegar. They could have even combined all of them in one epic plot
Palaven would've been cool in ME3 actually. I almost suspect it was slightly planned. They at least had some stories to fit there. Jack and her kids are there, Grunt is there, Garrus' dad is there, and Kal'Reegar. They could have even combined all of them in epic plot
^Kickstarter, let's get it moving.
Jessica Merizan tweeted strongly hinting that the geth and EDI could survive the Destroy ending (at least in a high EMS version), albiet in a diminished capacity. The geth would return to their pre-upload Consensus mentality, and EDI would lose her Reaper upgrades effectively crippling her capabilities. Instead we got confirmation that they all fried
Your alternative hardly changes anything. Without Reaper tech jammed into their code, the quarians fry the geth as soon as totally not Reaper controlled or green Borg drone assimilated Xen and Gerrel realize what has happened, just like they were about to over Rannoch (unless you slaughtered their entire species just to get at them, which I doubt you did with your insistence on happy endings). EDI without Reaper tech isn't even the same AI. At best, it's that murderous Hannibal system that caused the Luna incident, and more likely it's just rendered nonfunctional with intergral parts of software making up its OS deleted. Either way, it's for all intents and purposes just as "dead" as in the current Destroy ending.
If neither of those things happened, then you are basically taking parts of Synthesis's transhuman mind controlling, robot sentience applying space magic, so why wouldn't you just pick synthesis anyway?
The problem with this argument is that you're expecting the mere fact of the distance to do all the work, but you're not actually bothering to explain why it has that effect. If it's just a feeling you have that can't be explained, you can stop now. We get that you have a feeling.Did I fall asleep at the keyboard and forget to type "part of"? No, I must not have, because you quoted me.
I'd be pretty p*ssed if BG2 was suddenly set on Krynn with no explanation or a supremely lame one. That would be far ore "Baldur's Gate in Name Only" than moving a few miles further south along the coast.
I don't even want to compare D&D to ME... because PnP worlds don't have uber special protagonists that video games do... and they don't crap in their own nests (i.e. destroy their own settings). You can tell many more kinds of stories in it, because the world goes on... most of the time unaffected.
Ever hear of Traveller? That universe was blown up every bit as badly as low-EMS Destroy.I don't even want to compare D&D to ME... because PnP worlds don't have uber special protagonists that video games do... and they don't crap in their own nests (i.e. destroy their own settings). You can tell many more kinds of stories in it, because the world goes on... most of the time unaffected.
Palaven would've been cool in ME3 actually. I almost suspect it was slightly planned. They at least had some stories to fit there. Jack and her kids are there, Grunt is there, Garrus' dad is there, and Kal'Reegar. They could have even combined all of them in one epic plot
After getting the new Primarch, head to Palaven to help with the fighting for a bit.
I would also like to of seen Thessia before the mission. Have it as a hub until it becomes closed at a certain point. The same for Sur'Kesh and Tuchanka. Sur'kesh could be used as a hub if the genophage is sabotaged and Tuchanka be a hub if the genophage is cured.
Your alternative hardly changes anything. Without Reaper tech jammed into their code, the quarians fry the geth as soon as totally not Reaper controlled or green Borg drone assimilated Xen and Gerrel realize what has happened, just like they were about to over Rannoch (unless you slaughtered their entire species just to get at them, which I doubt you did with your insistence on happy endings). EDI without Reaper tech isn't even the same AI. At best, it's that murderous Hannibal system that caused the Luna incident, and more likely it's just rendered nonfunctional with intergral parts of software making up its OS deleted. Either way, it's for all intents and purposes just as "dead" as in the current Destroy ending.
If neither of those things happened, then you are basically taking parts of Synthesis's transhuman mind controlling, robot sentience applying space magic, so why wouldn't you just pick synthesis anyway?
In regards to EDI, I don't really care about after-the-fact word of god tweets and similar BS, but I do want to point out a few things:
A. The words "Reaper Tech" are a phrase used to describe... something. We don't know if it's software, hardware, or blood-magic.
So when we say that "Reaper Tech" got destroyed, we don't really know what was destroyed precisely.
B. Because of the nebulous nature of the term "Reaper Tech", I don't think we can assume that EDI was transformed into a different and potentially hostile AI (or even destroyed), because while I believe that "Reaper Tech" was used in the creation of the mobile platform and some of the Cyber Warfare assets, the AI itself is likely similar if not identical to traditional AI designs.
C. Regarding the Murderous AI on Luna, we don't really know what happened there, it could be and even likely that Cerberus took the short and stupid route like always, and pushed some button that they shouldn't have, so that they can measure the effectiveness of a weaponized AI and what it actually takes to dispose of it.
EDI itself, which is an evolution of said AI, was proven as an entity willing to cooperate and exist side by side with organics. Despite my misgivings about AI in general and the totality of their danger (the potential danger is actually on the level of what Dr Archer said about his "AI" - a technological apocalypse), I believe that such an entity deserves to be given the chance to exist, if only because we need to understand why some AI become homicidal and others don't. AI has a great positive potential as well, and learning how to minimize risks by working with an allied AI seems to me something of the highest priority.
Ever hear of Traveller? That universe was blown up every bit as badly as low-EMS Destroy.
My brother owned it... but I never touched it. This is like.... mid 80s
Good to know though.
Warhammer just got destroyed too. But these are big top down decisions from the companies.. nothing in the hands of players. And it took decades anyways.
Warhammer just got destroyed too. But these are big top down decisions from the companies.. nothing in the hands of players. And it took decades anyways.
But a PnP GM can do anything he damn well pleases with the gameworld. Well, as long as the players will put up with it...
But a PnP GM can do anything he damn well pleases with the gameworld. Well, as long as the players will put up with it...
True, but most are trying to make it a regular hobby and trying to have fun. Not just there to see things get trashed. Kind of defeats the purpose.
Also, players won't put up with a unique snowflake among themselves either. They're all in the same boat. This dictates how world shaking the stories will go. Usually it's going to be a more toned down adventure because of this.
We could talk about the space magic aspect, but that's a separate discussion to be had.
Regardless, this highlights why your argument doesn't work, with respect to the idea that Andromeda is "Mass Effect in name only", compared to the idea that BG2 is "Baldur's Gate in name only". And likewise with the Palaven comparison earlier.
BG2 is ultimately nothing more than a spin-off title of BG1. And if that standard allows for a game like BG2 to be comfortably sit inside the Baldur's Gate universe without issues, then the same applies to Andromeda with respect to Mass Effect.
Alas I've never played Baldurs Gate so I'll put it in Dragon Age terms. Wouldn't the equivalent of Mass Effect Andomeda in Dragon Age be basically setting the game on another planet rather than another country or even continent. You could still have races hopping along but all the lore built up about the different nations as well as the mysteries would largely be thrown aside never to be addressed again.
Retour en haut
