I am however liking the sound of "strong ties to the original trilogy"
Now you're just twisting things to give them a fatalistic bent. He was specifically talking about new players being able to jump straight into MEA without any knowledge of the previous games.
Just read something in Polygon's interview with Mac Walters...
"But there are strong ties to the original trilogy that players will recognize. "
Walters compares the original trilogy to a sort of foundational background; it's established the game's species and the general concepts and technology of the Mass Effect universe. That means new players can jump into this game with no previous knowledge of Shepard or the reapers.
"We'll be re-explaining [the series' technology and concepts] in this game, but other than that, this is very much a standalone game that then takes place in a completely new galaxy," he said.
This sounds like it's getting into soft-reboot territory. Having to re-explain the core concepts and all the technology of the universe? Idk, something about that statement doesn't sit right with me.
I am however liking the sound of "strong ties to the original trilogy"
Codex. that all. Is like they could remove the Codex entry of Mess Effect if it was for the fans since oyu read the same codex 3 times already ( probably more do to replays) but new players need to read and get explains this codex. Same goes for the spcies and technology.
It was state that this isnt a reboot, and it was state that the reaper war happen. Many interviews have state this alreaedy.
I'd say if ark vessels were that easy to deploy, the Reapers never would have completed a single cycle.
Other cycles didn't have the luxury of some years of knowing that the Reapers were coming. Their centre of political power was usually destroyed the moment the Reapers arrived, and they'd probably cause far more massive damage then what the Reapers did in the first moments of ME3. If I recall communication between systems were cut off as well. Javik knew little to nothing about Ilos.
Also, every species might have different plans to how to survive. The Protheans planned to have some of their kind in stasis and restart anew after thousands of years. We seem to have picked a differnt solution.
Indeed. With galaxy wide communication and travel cut off without warning by the Reapers, there was no way to prepare any contingency plan.
Until our cycle, Reapers were the very definition of an "Outside Context Problem".
I already said that engines are a problem, so what´s your point? Let me repeat myself: Engines aside, the construction of the arks is indeed possible. We already have stasis pods, as is evident if you look around the SR-1. Hull? Check! Systems? Check! Leaving the engines. That is the problem.
Its completely unrealistic for the galaxy to suddenly develop FTL that is capable of traveling to other galaxies in a ridiculous short time frame. Again it all has to do with writing.
That particular post was made under the assumption that the arks leave during ME3. Looking back at the trailer, that was a foolish assumption. If they leave between ME2 and ME3, there is no need to mention a Plan B, as that plan no longer exists. Could you call it a retcon? Yes. But compared to the engine problem, it really is a very minor one.
Even small retcon's begin to add up and Bioware has a history of implementing bad retcon's. Also as Vortex mentioned jumping ship shouldn't be plan A and since the ark ships are clearly seen orbiting the earth there is no way the true nature of the ships can remain secret for long.
Reapers still need to discharge, they can just hold it in much longer. You can see them discharging whenever they land on a planet and start shooting lightning out of their hulls.
The Reapers' thrusters and FTL drives appear to propel them at more than twice the speed of Citadel ships. Estimates of their location in dark space suggest they can travel nearly 30 light-years in a 24-hour period.
Reaper power sources seem to violate known physical laws. Reapers usually destroy fuel infrastructure rather than attempting to capture it intact, indicating that Reapers do not require organic species' energy supplies. Consequently, the Reapers attack without regard for maintaining supply lines behind them, except to move husks from one planet to another. Unlike Citadel ships, Reapers do not appear to discharge static buildup from their drive cores, although they sometimes appear wreathed in static discharge when they land on planets.
The biggest indicator that the launch of the Ark ships is post ME3 is the fact that they seem to incorporate the Crucible into their designs. Like, no way that wasn't intentional. And it makes sense, given the insane distances these ships are meant to travel.
Ultimately, my biggest concern is going to be what comes AFTER Andromeda. Say the game is amazing (and God do I hope it is, it looks like it could be rad), and sells well. Well, then what?
We're eventually going to have a situation where we have two Mass Effect settings, one in the Milky Way, on in Andromeda. If we stay in Andromeda, we can't go back to the setting of the original trilogy, and if they go back to the Milky Way, everything we build in Andromeda gets left hanging.
I really hope they solve this by bridging both galaxies together or something. Because putting us in a situation where they're both going to be eternally separate is going to cause really big issues with the sustainability of the franchise going forward, which isn't what I want to see happen. I like to think Bioware has accounted for this, but I worry.
Unless this is meant to be the last game in the franchise. Which would make me very, very sad.
The Ark would need a HUGE power source to keep it going that long. A power source similar to the Crucible. If they managed to get these Ark ships running, why did it take them so long to build the Crucible?
Just spitballing here, but what if the reason we were able to complete the Crucible as quickly as we did is because we already had facilities for building Arks lying around? That would even explain why they kind of look similar. As for why the Crucible took a while to build, well, they were trying to build something without even being sure what it was going to do. I'm sure there were hangups and delays.
If we were building stuff like the Crucible, why wouldn't we have just kept those around instead of shooting them off into space so we could deploy them against the Reapers? Instead of spending all game building a new one? Doesn't track.
The Crucible looks like the blueprints for the Crucible.
The biggest indicator that the launch of the Ark ships is post ME3 is the fact that they seem to incorporate the Crucible into their designs. Like, no way that wasn't intentional. And it makes sense, given the insane distances these ships are meant to travel.
Ultimately, my biggest concern is going to be what comes AFTER Andromeda. Say the game is amazing (and God do I hope it is, it looks like it could be rad), and sells well. Well, then what?
We're eventually going to have a situation where we have two Mass Effect settings, one in the Milky Way, on in Andromeda. If we stay in Andromeda, we can't go back to the setting of the original trilogy, and if they go back to the Milky Way, everything we build in Andromeda gets left hanging.
I really hope they solve this by bridging both galaxies together or something. Because putting us in a situation where they're both going to be eternally separate is going to cause really big issues with the sustainability of the franchise going forward, which isn't what I want to see happen. I like to think Bioware has accounted for this, but I worry.
Unless this is meant to be the last game in the franchise. Which would make me very, very sad.
They confirmed the launch of the Ark ships happens before the endings.
Also, I think the developers might not want to come back to the MW in ME, ever,
If we were building stuff like the Crucible, why wouldn't we have just kept those around instead of shooting them off into space so we could deploy them against the Reapers? Instead of spending all game building a new one? Doesn't track.
The Crucible looks like the blueprints for the Crucible.
I doubt its a canon ending. A retcon would be more likely.
Preach it!
Not only because it would be better, but also because it would show that they can FINALLY admit that they blundered big time in ME3 (note: I don't feel pleasure "bashing" that game, but it does NOT deserve praise and it doesn't deserve to be mentioned along ME1 and 2 either - even if you discard the "artistic vision" ending...linearity, ruined choices etc. enough said - the only thing that's great (in an otherwise mediocre to bad game!) is the gamplay: much more fluid than in ME1 and 2!)
ps: I'd love to know what makes the OP think that the planet is necessarily Earth? 
It wouldn't surprise me if other arks have escaped the Reapers before. They likely wouldn't care anyway — not their turf.
We still have yet to address whether the Reapers operated out of other galaxies or not. The assumption that they just hibernated in Dark Space all the while remains just that- for all we know, they could spend most of their time in almost-constant activity across the universe, with the Milky Way force we saw at the end of ME2 being on standby for when conditions were set.
Given that the Reaper cycles never made logical sense all the way back in ME1, from the premise of the 'trap' and locking Sovereign out when the rest could fly over anyway, there are infinite number of unsatisfactory answers considering what the premise of the trilogy was based on.
how can people not tell that the planet was Earth?
Again, the ARKs and fleets are picture over earth... I agree. That doesn't mean the ARKs were built there. They can obviously move, so they could conceivable move from the hidden place they were built to earth at some point. Nothing we've been shown so far shows an ARK being launched from earth or obviously under construction over earth.
Actually, looking at the trailer again, the ARKs aren't even shown over earth. The shuttles are shown over earth, but they fly an "undetermined" distance before reaching the ARKs... likely not a huge distance, but the shuttles can go on their own some distance (e.g. when Shepard takes the shuttle for the next mission and leaves the Normandy open for the Collectors to board, the shuttle must have been some distance from the Normandy or the Collector ship would have detected it as well).
Hackett is the one presenting that blueprint.
No, Liara presents the blueprint to Hackett, and then to the Council after Mars. This blueprint was what you got from the Mars archive.
Its completely unrealistic for the galaxy to suddenly develop FTL that is capable of traveling to other galaxies in a ridiculous short time frame. Again it all has to do with writing.
Even small retcon's begin to add up and Bioware has a history of implementing bad retcon's. Also as Vortex mentioned jumping ship shouldn't be plan A and since the ark ships are clearly seen orbiting the earth there is no way the true nature of the ships can remain secret for long.
You do realize that I agree with you on the FTL matter, no?
The biggest indicator that the launch of the Ark ships is post ME3 is the fact that they seem to incorporate the Crucible into their designs. Like, no way that wasn't intentional. And it makes sense, given the insane distances these ships are meant to travel.
Ultimately, my biggest concern is going to be what comes AFTER Andromeda. Say the game is amazing (and God do I hope it is, it looks like it could be rad), and sells well. Well, then what?
We're eventually going to have a situation where we have two Mass Effect settings, one in the Milky Way, on in Andromeda. If we stay in Andromeda, we can't go back to the setting of the original trilogy, and if they go back to the Milky Way, everything we build in Andromeda gets left hanging.
I really hope they solve this by bridging both galaxies together or something. Because putting us in a situation where they're both going to be eternally separate is going to cause really big issues with the sustainability of the franchise going forward, which isn't what I want to see happen. I like to think Bioware has accounted for this, but I worry.
Unless this is meant to be the last game in the franchise. Which would make me very, very sad.
The MW is done. It was used to tell the story of the Shepard. Andromeda will be the setting for the next games.
They confirmed the launch of the Ark ships happens before the endings.
Also, I think the developers might not want to come back to the MW in ME, ever,
Link to the confirmation? Only if it's confirmation, not speculation.
The MW is done. It was used to tell the story of the Shepard. Andromeda will be the setting for the next games.
I don't think Bioware knows what's coming after Andromeda, let alone you. Honestly, I think the direction the series is going to go in is going to depend greatly on this game's success.
Ultimately, my biggest concern is going to be what comes AFTER Andromeda. Say the game is amazing (and God do I hope it is, it looks like it could be rad), and sells well. Well, then what?
I believe the game will do well. I'm curious what they do if for some reason it doesn't do well for whatever reason. Time will answer those questions.
We're eventually going to have a situation where we have two Mass Effect settings, one in the Milky Way, on in Andromeda. If we stay in Andromeda, we can't go back to the setting of the original trilogy, and if they go back to the Milky Way, everything we build in Andromeda gets left hanging.
If the game is successful, have the team keep making games taking place in Andromeda. EA gets another team to work on Mass Effect games that take place in the Milky Way. Would EA do that? I wouldn't bet on it.
Unless this is meant to be the last game in the franchise. Which would make me very, very sad.
I doubt its the last game especially if it does well. Even if it does poorly, they could always go back to the Milky Way. Time will tell.
I'm sure EA has sat down and discussed what they will do if, that and this happens.
Those are Alliance warships. We are looking down on them.
No, Liara presents the blueprint to Hackett, and then to the Council after Mars. This blueprint was what you got from the Mars archive.
In those two scenes it's just a bunch of components though. We only see the completed version once Hackett gives you an update on building it later.
The scenes you're talking about are around minutes 38 and 55 in the video. In both cases, Liara presents pieces. The final form of the crucible only takes shape after Hacket and the alliance gets hold of it and start building it, later in the game.
Link to the confirmation? Only if it's confirmation, not speculation.
http://www.ign.com/a...ffect-andromeda
More specifically:
" I think, aside from the fact that we said the Mass Effect trilogy was a trilogy for Shepard’s story, which we have concluded, we were very careful to make sure that big choices like that [the Mass Effect 3 finale] wouldn’t impact your decisions.
"From that, you can probably infer the timing of when they [the Andromeda explorers] left, to a certain degree."
The MW is done. It was used to tell the story of the Shepard. Andromeda will be the setting for the next games.
99% of the MW is uncharted there are numerous stories that can be told without Shepard.
Retour en haut