436 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

They're exploring an entirely new galaxy. That's both drastic and different.

And again, this is almost identical in design to what Star Trek has repeatedly done over the years.

[AlanC9]

I don't know if you should be praising Iakus with that, Hexxagone; he was one of the more prominent "ME:A isn't really Mass Effect" posters until a few weeks ago.

[The Dystopian Hound]

They're exploring an entirely new galaxy. That's both drastic and different.

And again, this is almost identical in design to what Star Trek has repeatedly done over the years.

True.

[dreamgazer]

I don't know if you should be praising Iakus with that; he was one of the more prominent "ME:A isn't really Mass Effect" posters until a few weeks ago.

Oh!

Iakus, has this changed?

[Onuris22]

I think it was a good move, you put the Mass Effect DNA and good basis for a story there then let it go off to do it's own thing. Completely divesting yourself of what came before would be kind of boring if they did it too often.

[ACika011]

I would have been way happier if they went with the IT and made ME4.

 

But dont be so negative, it will probably be a great game, hopefully.

[The Dystopian Hound]

I would have been way happier if they went with the IT and made ME4.

But dont be so negative, it will probably be a great game, hopefully.

IT doesn't exist. Endo story. And this is ME4. Not by name buy by number.

[Arcian]

They're exploring an entirely new galaxy. That's both drastic and different.

And again, this is almost identical in design to what Star Trek has repeatedly done over the years.

Yes, Star Trek has left the Milky Way a grand total of zero times. Almost identical, indeed.

[Hexxagone]

They're exploring an entirely new galaxy. That's both drastic and different.

Nope, Mass Effect 4 set in the Milky Way would have brought us to new locations, Bioware doesn't get points for that.

[The Dystopian Hound]

Nope, Mass Effect 4 set in the Milky Way would have brought us to new locations, Bioware doesn't get points for that.

Well too bad. I guess this is the place to cry about it.

[Arcian]

DING DING DING

And we have a winner ladies and gentlemen! Bioware was so unimaginative and desperate to continue where they left off that they dragged along the Milky Way races. Making your endings meaningless and having Andormeda be a carbon copy of the last trilogy so they can pick up where they left off instead of doing something drastic and different.

BioWare didn't want to do something drastic and different, they wanted to do the exact same thing, just without having to deal with the ending quagmire they created.

[In Exile]

Oh completely true and that goes to the subjective experience. I guess my counter-argument is that one of the ways ME3 avoids having to give in to that is that it takes a lot of those heavy body count moments out of the players control and instead makes them the stage on which things happen. For example, Shepard goes to Palaven and sees the utter destruction caused by the Reapers, leaving it all behind.

That all is a part of the individual experience and I don't think a player's subjective experience on the game being a B level action movie where Shepard constantly wins could be argued. Where I have difficulties is dismissing that information provided by the game off-hand and even furthermore being shocked that the game that has constantly shown you the carnage and hopelessness of the Reaper War suddenly once again reminds the player of the shock and carnage of the Reaper War in a more direct manner.

But faceless hordes are massacred all the time in B movies. That's part of the B movie experience - you don't see the visceral carnage as a powerless spectator. You look at it from a distance as the ubermensch, with the mountains of the dead faceless victims just being another testament to how awesome you are as a protagonist.

[Seraphim24]

But faceless hordes are massacred all the time in B movies. That's part of the B movie experience - you don't see the visceral carnage as a powerless spectator. You look at it from a distance as the ubermensch, with the mountains of the dead faceless victims just being another testament to how awesome you are as a protagonist.

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that!

[dreamgazer]

Yes, Star Trek has left the Milky Way a grand total of zero times. Almost identical, indeed.

Does that really matter as it pertains to the original "copycat" topic?

Everything's being emulated / carried over to a new setting. So yeah, almost identical.

Nope, Mass Effect 4 set in the Milky Way would have brought us to new locations, Bioware doesn't get points for that.

Eh, then neither would be "drastic" or "different" concepts, then. Andromeda at least has the newness of a different galaxy going for it, which completely resets the stakes. The Milky Way would have to deal with Fermi Paradox plot holes every step of the way.

[capn233]

Really there isn't much difference in not dealing with various pieces of previous plot in MWG and not dealing with them in Andromeda.  I have a feeling most buyers wouldn't even care if the game is good.

[dreamgazer]

Really there isn't much difference in not dealing with various pieces of previous plot in MWG and not dealing with them in Andromeda. I have a feeling most buyers wouldn't even care if the game is good.

Perhaps, but that's another point in Andromeda's favor. The general public will think going to a new galaxy is cooler than opening up random relays for funzies.

[Iakus]

Oh!

Iakus, has this changed?

Well, they're slapping the Mass Effect label on it.  Sp the technical answer is "yes"

 

But otoh, they're abandoning the entire setting including the Mass Relay network, which was pretty much the iconic symbol for Mass Effect.

 

So I suppose MEA will be as much a Mass Effect game as much as a Stargate program is without stargates.

 

But again, what does it matter?  Bioware will pull out or shove in whatever they want.  All while saying "Player choice is very important to us" and calling the game "Mass Effect"

[Iakus]

Perhaps, but that's another point in Andromeda's favor. The general public will think going to a new galaxy is cooler than opening up random relays for funzies.

Why?  That's pretty much what Stargate was all about

 

The one where they hopped onto a giant ship and explored a new galaxy was the one that crashed and burned.

[In Exile]

Well, they're slapping the Mass Effect label on it. Sp the technical answer is "yes"

But otoh, they're abandoning the entire setting including the Mass Relay network, which was pretty much the iconic symbol for Mass Effect.

So I suppose MEA will be as much a Mass Effect game as much as a Stargate program is without stargates.

But again, what does it matter? Bioware will pull out or shove in whatever they want. All while saying "Player choice is very important to us" and calling the game "Mass Effect"

Or like stark trek without the stark trekking? Because DS9 was all the better for it.

[dreamgazer]

Why?  That's pretty much what Stargate was all about

Because it's a new galaxy, and going by ME1-3, most players think we've pretty well tackled the entirety of the Milky Way.

[Geth Supremacy]

I haven't got to check much out about it, but this is pretty funny.  I wouldn't expect anything less coming off of DA: I though.

 

Did they have anything about the MP at E3?

[Onuris22]

Because it's a new galaxy, and going by ME1-3, most players think we've pretty well tackled the entirety of the Milky Way.

 

I mean, we did pretty much tie things up except for what happened after...but deciding what happened after seemed like a no go with how the community handled the endings anyway.

 

Makes sense to move away from the core and just take some inspiration from what came before then build and expand. But, I guess people just want "Let's randomly change everything and make a new game that has no real reason to be called Mass Effect!"

[In Exile]

Because it's a new galaxy, and going by ME1-3, most players think we've pretty well tackled the entirety of the Milky Way.

They're really isn't a lot of room for any new race in the MW. You're just asking for nonsense that way - how did these races avoid the Reaper genocide, etc. The MW setting is dead, because it can't advance past the Citadel. Now the pre-ME1 setting had a lot of promise in absence of the reapers - just a galactic civilization built on the ashes of a precursor society with a lot of political intrigue and humanity trying to find its place. They could have tried that kind of soft reboot. But otherwise there's not much to the setting.

[Onuris22]

I haven't got to check much out about it, but this is pretty funny.  I wouldn't expect anything less coming off of DA: I though.

 

Did they have anything about the MP at E3?

 

~Multiplayer is optional and you can experience everything the singleplayer has to offer without participating in multiplayer. But when you do choose to play multiplayer, the experience will feel seamless from the singleplayer experience.

 

~The multiplayer matches will be similar to ME3's but have more freedom and chaos

 

 

Info obtained from the interviews at E3/etc, but that's kind of all we have atm.

[dreamgazer]

They're really isn't a lot of room for any new race in the MW. You're just asking for nonsense that way - how did these races avoid the Reaper genocide, etc. The MW setting is dead, because it can't advance past the Citadel. Now the pre-ME1 setting had a lot of promise in absence of the reapers - just a galactic civilization built on the ashes of a precursor society with a lot of political intrigue and humanity trying to find its place. They could have tried that kind of soft reboot. But otherwise there's not much to the setting.

"Dead" is a strong word, but yeah, staying in the MW would require jumping many unnecessary hurdles and sidestepping many unnecessary holes about galactic interaction and integration.