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.
Pretty much.
Ever hear of Traveller? That universe was blown up every bit as badly as low-EMS Destroy.
Edit: come to think of it, didn't the FR have that whole Spellplague thing?
I have run some great campaigns in the original Traveller setting as well as Megatraveller and Traveller: The New era. Sigh, those were the days. 
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.
To be fair, Bioware doesn't really have that much experience. I think MEA can benefit from DAI's experience (and the lack of old gen) and have a better open world then the latter.
To be fair, Bioware doesn't really have that much experience. I think MEA can benefit from DAI's experience (and the lack of old gen) and have a better open world then the latter.
That's true, but I think it takes more than one game. And I don't think they're even inspired by the right ideas. They take a theme park approach. It doesn't feel sandboxy. And they fill space with collectibles and other nonsense (granted GTA does this too... even though they make good sandboxes).
There's one tiny quest that reminded me of TES.. that abandoned shack that one apostate was holed up in... where he had a pile of corpses in the cellar. TES is full of stuff like that.
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.
Well that's the real question: it's not just about distance though; it's about how much relevance the old world has in the new one.
In Andromeda's case, we're bringing a huge ship filled with the diverse alien races, the technology, the ME history, and (who knows) even a character cameo or more from ME1/2. We can have a make-shift Spectre force or even Council, as inspired by the original organization. You can also have interesting dilemmas arise, inspired by the original trilogy; imagine for example the Krogan getting the chance to uplift a species they discover in Andromeda, which would lead to some interesting questions.
If somebody wants to say it's going to be different from traditional Mass Effect; they'd be very much correct - but spin offs quite often take this sort of approach, especially since ME3's endings (even putting aside the controversy) meant that any ME4 we got was going to have to be radically different from the trilogy, even if the endings had been amazing.
If we want a comparison for just how diverse a setting can be, we can also look to the Star Wars expanded universe - one galaxy in that case, but with hundreds of stories with different characters, organizations, plots, time periods, and each of them so radically different from each other, besides the basic label of Star Wars.
That's true, but I think it takes more than one game. And I don't think they're even inspired by the right ideas. They take a theme park approach. It doesn't feel sandboxy. And they fill space with collectibles and other nonsense (granted GTA does this too... even though they make good sandboxes).
There's one tiny quest that reminded me of TES.. that abandoned shack that one apostate was holed up in... where he had a pile of corpses in the cellar. TES is full of stuff like that.
You're right it might take more time, and there's the fact a open world ME game is different from a open world game. I am a bit skeptical of something they mentioned in the leak.
I'm not going to expect them to deliver the best open world in a vg though, just a better one then DAI.
I'd rather they do what they're good at. Or were getting good at. More cinematic focus. Open worlds are overrated. And they're only fun when I can be a psychopathic freak anyways. Someone who causes complete misery for all the NPCs and snipes from rooftops. Which kind of goes against the Bioware MO.
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.
Yes, we didn't see Palaven in ME1. But we knew about it. We met turians, and even those who were from Palaven, like Garrus. ANd there was the hope of seeing it in a future installment: ME2, ME3, ME4, etc.
Do you remember in the early days of ME3's hype how excited people were that we'd finally see Earth, Mars, Sur'Kesh, Rannoch, etc?
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.
Funny thing, I'm replaying BG now. And going to Athkatla is relevant, in a way. Part of the Iron Crises was the threat of war between Baldur's Gate and Amn. We are, in fact, seeing "the other side" of the conflict.
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.
As I said, we visited the northern edge of Amn in the first game. In BG2 we got to see more of it, and even met a few characters mentioned but never seen in the first game.
BG2 continued to explore the implications of being the Bhaalspawn, the progeny of the dead god of murder. Heck it's the whole reason Irenicus was interested in you. None of this vague "You're a symbol" nonsense. We can only hope that "humans are special" will not be further explored in MEA
What connection does Andromeda have with Mass Effect so far? Have we met anyone from there? Did Shepard ever visit an Andromeda world? Did the Council have any economic or trade treaties with races from Andromeda that the Reaper War threatened? Has visiting Andromeda ever even been mentioned as a possibility?
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.
That is exactly what I'm saying.
Not at all. I love the characters of the trilogy as much as the next person, but their stories are done and with Andromeda not being a numbered sequel Bioware has a chance to reinvent the franchise and maybe bring back people who were disappointed by how Mass Effect 3 turned out. This is why I wont be surprised if it is announced that Andromeda's place in the timeline is a prequel and has little to no references to anything from the trilogy.
That is exactly what I'm saying.
And if they were to move that far from Dragon Age, they might as well just make a new Jade Empire game 
I'd rather they do what they're good at. Or were getting good at. More cinematic focus. Open worlds are overrated. And they're only fun when I can be a psychopathic freak anyways. Someone who causes complete misery for all the NPCs and snipes from rooftops. Which kind of goes against the Bioware MO.
Eh, that's not something only Bioware is doing. Almost everyone is falling in the open world trend.
Eh, that's not something only Bioware is doing. Almost everyone is falling in the open world trend.
I know... I don't lay it on them specifically. If I sound annoyed, it's because of the general problem here.
I know... I don't lay it on them specifically. If I sound annoyed, it's because of the general problem here.
Well, without going on the CDPR-Bioware comparison, they manage to fit their narrative style with the open world better then Bioware did (in my opinion). So I have hope Bioware improves on the DAI's model.
That is exactly what I'm saying.
And that's why you're wrong. Because it's not like moving to a different planet, since BG2 does abandon all of the stuff you mention. And this hypothetical conversation is nonsense - because other than the elaborate mental fantasy you've constructed, we have no idea how ME:A will approach any part of the ME universe, including racial politics.
Well, without going on the CDPR-Bioware comparison, they manage to fit their narrative style with the open world better then Bioware did (in my opinion). So I have hope Bioware improves on the DAI's model.
That's because CDPR is better. I'm convinced. Not just different. Better.
I won't derail too much on that though
Yes, we didn't see Palaven in ME1. But we knew about it. We met turians, and even those who were from Palaven, like Garrus. ANd there was the hope of seeing it in a future installment: ME2, ME3, ME4, etc.
Do you remember in the early days of ME3's hype how excited people were that we'd finally see Earth, Mars, Sur'Kesh, Rannoch, etc?
We'll still know about Palaven in ME:A - and there will be Turians on the Ark, and it's pretty easy for us to meet characters who were from Palaven or have a history there - ME:A meets all the requirements you just allowed for ME1.
If this is the argument, "well, we might see Palaven in a different game", I'm not sure that would sway Bioware on any level. If that's enough, then I propose Bioware could make Andromeda 2 - some arbitrary way down the line - which takes place far enough into the future for us to see Palaven again through regular Andromeda-Milky Way contact. And people may just as well be excited to see how Palaven changes in all that time. The point is you're employing a double standard. What you are applying to ME1 is not being applied equally to Andromeda. "We had the hope of seeing Palaven in the future" - but you didn't see it in ME1 and that was fine, ergo Andromeda will be fine without Palaven.
As I said, we visited the northern edge of Amn in the first game. In BG2 we got to see more of it, and even met a few characters mentioned but never seen in the first game.
The Northern edge of Amn is the northern edge of Amn. I believe we spend the entire game in Athkatla. Regarding the second bit, Andromeda will meet that criteria if they throw a couple cameos on the Ark.
BG2 continued to explore the implications of being the Bhaalspawn, the progeny of the dead god of murder. Heck it's the whole reason Irenicus was interested in you. None of this vague "You're a symbol" nonsense. We can only hope that "humans are special" will not be further explored in MEA
^In that case, Andromeda can function as the story exploring the implications of the displaced Council races, forced to flee their home, friends, and family, in the face of genocide for the unknown - to essentially act as the new humans in their own First Contact War, while attempting to navigate their political hurdles and exploring new planets. Actually, that sounds extremely applicable for a Mass Effect spin off, given both ME1 and ME3, and matches your Bhaalspawn comparison fairly well.
What connection does Andromeda have with Mass Effect so far? Have we met anyone from there? Did Shepard ever visit an Andromeda world? Did the Council have any economic or trade treaties with races from Andromeda that the Reaper War threatened? Has visiting Andromeda ever even been mentioned as a possibility?
Beyond the fact that we're taking the races, technology, history, political tension, with us? That we're potentially getting an "East meets West"-type setting? I'd really not like to explain what a spin off is again. Having no contact with the galaxy you're going to encounter for the first time is the entire idea behind "exploring the unknown".
What you have missed in a digital game (like BG) will still be....somewhere. Just not from Bioware. They're very lively settings. It doesn't revolve around BG and BG2. There's a ton of material for any given campaign.
Mass Effect is victim of one plot. It's not much of a setting. In the same way most stories are just the sum of their plots. They're not worlds with any longterm value, in their own right. And now Andromeda is trying to defy that. Because people just can't let it rest. And it's only Mass Effect by the loosest, most abstract reasons.
In the argument between hard reboot in the Milky Way and soft reboot in Andromeda, there's essentially a few things that could happen:
1. Hard reboot that changes very little of the original lore
Not only do we keep a lot of the negative things about the Mass Effect universe, but we'd be treading similar (if not, the exact same) ground as the OT. There's no way we can explore the same cultural/political dynamics of the ME universe without going through the same stories. BioWare would also essentially be admitting out loud that they completely messed up Mass Effect. While that may be true, I'd rather they just move on than try to do it all over again and reclaim the "glory days."
2. Hard reboot that makes many changes to original lore
In this case, we'd have the chance to fix some of the issues with ME's lore and decreasing the likelihood of regurgitating the same story beats, but after all these changes what's the point of even calling this game Mass Effect? It would just be better to make a whole new Mass Effect like sci-fi game with totally new lore and culture dynamics.
3. Soft reboot in Andromeda
We're keeping a fair bit of ME's baggage, but we get to ignore many of the more problematic aspects of ME. We keep similar culture dynamics, technology, etc., but now we get to see them interact with a different environment. That means there's very little chance of retreading. The only concession is actual act of traveling to Andromeda , which isn't even a difficult pill to swallow.
That's because CDPR is better. I'm convinced. Not just different. Better.
I won't derail too much on that though
Eh, I don't have a problem with your opinion. People have their preferences, one way or another.
I was just using TW3 as a reference, since Bioware and CDPR's game are more similar to each other then Bethesda. Anyway, I still think Bioware can improve on their open world system. I just keep a share of caution 
Eh, I don't have a problem with your opinion. People have their preferences, one way or another.
I was just using TW3 as a reference, since Bioware and CDPR's game are more similar to each other then Bethesda. Anyway, I still think Bioware can improve on their open world system. I just keep a share of caution
I'll give you that. They're more similar to each other than Bethesda (which is a good thing..). I just think CDPR is now doing it better.
Not at all. I love the characters of the trilogy as much as the next person, but their stories are done and with Andromeda not being a numbered sequel Bioware has a chance to reinvent the franchise and maybe bring back people who were disappointed by how Mass Effect 3 turned out. This is why I wont be surprised if it is announced that Andromeda's place in the timeline is a prequel and has little to no references to anything from the trilogy.
I don't really see how a prequel could make much sense for this setting. Why would there be some super secret expedition to Andromeda before the reapers are a known threat?
What connection does Andromeda have with Mass Effect so far? Have we met anyone from there? Did Shepard ever visit an Andromeda world? Did the Council have any economic or trade treaties with races from Andromeda that the Reaper War threatened? Has visiting Andromeda ever even been mentioned as a possibility?
You appear to think that a setting can't expand into the unknown.
I think an SF setting with elements of exploration absolutely should expand into the unknown. Also, since ME plays out in an imagined alternate future of our own world, any real place we know of is implicitly already part of the setting. Andromeda was always part of the MEU, we just didn't have anything to do with it. That's going to change, and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't.
What connection does Andromeda have with Mass Effect so far? Have we met anyone from there? Did Shepard ever visit an Andromeda world? Did the Council have any economic or trade treaties with races from Andromeda that the Reaper War threatened? Has visiting Andromeda ever even been mentioned as a possibility?
Even before the announcement of ME:A, I always had the feeling that BioWare would leave all the problems of the MWG behind. It's a shame and kind of depressing. However, Mass Effect doesn't have to be restricted to one galaxy (even if I would've prefered that option. There's more than enough space there).. but the MWG contains everything that defines Mass Effect. The many different species and cultures, the politics, lore, history, technology, organizations and more. I'm concerned that BioWare won't be able to successfully make this transition.. essentially they'd have to "transport" all of this information into Andromeda and then incorporate it in a way that makes sense.
3. Soft reboot in Andromeda
We're keeping a fair bit of ME's baggage, but we get to ignore many of the more problematic aspects of ME. We keep similar culture dynamics, technology, etc., but now we get to see them interact with a different environment. That means there's very little chance of retreading.
I agree. A hard reboot of the franchise is not an appealing idea and a soft reboot is the better alternative.
You appear to think that a setting can't expand into the unknown.
I think an SF setting with elements of exploration absolutely should expand into the unknown. Also, since ME plays out in an imagined alternate future of our own world, any real place we know of is implicitly already part of the setting. Andromeda was always part of the MEU, we just didn't have anything to do with it. That's going to change, and I don't see any reason why it shouldn't.
I agree with you. The Andromeda Galaxy was obviously always a part of the Mass Effect Universe, but as I mentioned above the challenge will be to successfully transport us from the MWG to Andromeda and still make it feel like the Mass Effect we know and love.
There has to be a sense of continuity and that's the challenge for BioWare. I will reiterate what I said above: The MWG contains everything that defines Mass Effect. The many different species and cultures, the politics, lore, history, technology, organizations and more. I'm concerned that BioWare won't be able to succefully make this transition.. essentially they'd have to "transport" all of this information into Andromeda and then incorporate it in a way that makes sense.
EDIT: Obviously I'm not talking about literally copying everything from the MWG into Andromeda, that would be absurd. What I'm saying is that the totality of information in any given property is what gives it its essence. BioWare has to extract this essence and make sure to transmit it to Andromeda.
Retour en haut
