I disagree with that conclusion. I don't think there was really much potential left in the MW once you got rid of the Reapers. If we had a non-stupid ending, we'd still have a setting than ran its course.
Exactly. It could have been the best galaxy-altering ending in the world and we'd still have this exact problem. Just look at how much fans collectively complained about the import system in general.
Good endings doesn't solve the wildly diverging problem that ME3's endings have.
If it's dormant, it's still dormant for a reason.
I was wondering: how does that even work exactly? If we unlock a relay, we're now exposed to RGB. A new relay couldn't solve this issue.
Oh, I thought you were talking about Ark crew.BioWare is doing their duty to our species?
I disagree with that conclusion. I don't think there was really much potential left in the MW once you got rid of the Reapers. If we had a non-stupid ending, we'd still have a setting than ran its course.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who feels that way.
BioWare designed TMW with a particular set of species and conflicts as the setting for the Shepard trilogy. What they built in to that world ran its course in the events of the trilogy, which is complete.
In order to continue, they need to do a lot more world building - which may as well be done in another galaxy.
So here is a plot concept:
1) Reapers are unstoppable. The ending of ME 3 is about "how" you survive extinction not how you beat the Reapers. The game ends with you and your loved one (companions) making a fire in a cave - the Normandy sitting derelict outside, covered in foliage.
2) The Council decides that the only way to weather the storm is to follow the path of the Protheans, but do it right.
3) The galaxy enters a blackout of 400 years. No electricity, no science fiction, no nothing. The knowledge is kept - but the galaxy goes quiet.
4) 400 years later. Mass Effect 4 is a "re-discovery" of the galaxy.
Would that have been fun?
For all we know, that might be what happens with Refuse
How many stars are in the Milky Way?
One hundred billion at the low end. That's 100,000,000,000. I don't know about you, but that's a lot of zeroes.
And that's the lowest possible estimate. It may be as many as 300-400 billion, and even up to a full trillion now that they've discovered that the Milky Way is about 60% larger than previously estimated.
So here is a plot concept:
1) Reapers are unstoppable. The ending of ME 3 is about "how" you survive extinction not how you beat the Reapers. The game ends with you and your loved one (companions) making a fire in a cave - the Normandy sitting derelict outside, covered in foliage.
2) The Council decides that the only way to weather the storm is to follow the path of the Protheans, but do it right.
3) The galaxy enters a blackout of 400 years. No electricity, no science fiction, no nothing. The knowledge is kept - but the galaxy goes quiet.
4) 400 years later. Mass Effect 4 is a "re-discovery" of the galaxy.
Would that have been fun?
I always imagined a continuation would be
1) Reapers are beatable, but not easily
2) A DEM is used, which renders the relay network non-function
3) MW undergoes a "mini dark age" where the galactic community becomes isolated based on the range of standard ftl
4) A thousand years or so later, a new age of discovery begins as the galaxy starts to reconnect. Locations familiar to the player are rediscovered, but now very different. Governments, cultures, people have all developed in isolation. How have they changed? How are they still the same?
Exactly. It could have been the best galaxy-altering ending in the world and we'd still have this exact problem. Just look at how much fans collectively complained about the import system in general.
Good endings doesn't solve the wildly diverging problem that ME3's endings have.
Good thing we moved on.
Holy Limited Imagination.I disagree with that conclusion. I don't think there was really much potential left in the MW once you got rid of the Reapers. If we had a non-stupid ending, we'd still have a setting than ran its course.
I think that if I had just finished a trilogy and had such backlash at the ending, which effectively ended the story at that point unless they pulled a bigger deus ex machina out of their rears or did a time jump (which would still have to canonize an ending at some point,) I'd not want to immediately revisit the time period or area of space.
Especially if it isn't a story you want to tell yet. This doesn't mean Bioware can't go back and do it, but at least this way it gives them way more time to plan and think about what it would be instead of rushing it. Going to Andromeda avoids a lot of these issues while giving them the freedom to make fresh stories not bogged down by the previous games. Much as I'd like to know what happens after ME3 ends, story wise for them this was a good idea.
And I love the possibilities and the focus on a new group of people in a new place with a much different circumstance.
I always imagined a continuation would be
1) Reapers are beatable, but not easily
2) A DEM is used, which renders the relay network non-function
3) MW undergoes a "mini dark age" where the galactic community becomes isolated based on the range of standard ftl
4) A thousand years or so later, a new age of discovery begins as the galaxy starts to reconnect. Locations familiar to the player are rediscovered, but now very different. Governments, cultures, people have all developed in isolation. How have they changed? How are they still the same?
Personally, I think ME3 should have only had Destroy as the available ending (and cut out the Space Brat), since it's really the one that makes the most sense for the Crucible to have been designed to do... because I'd rather it have been a clearly defined Super-Weapon and not a magical Swiss Army Knife that probably can shoot thresher maws, surf the internet and dispense love advice if you hit the right panel.
Having the cost of the Reapers destruction be that the Relays were damaged (but explicitly not destroyed) would have been a fair trade. This could have ranged from some Relays only needing someone to flip the breakers, while others were left non-operational and would require years (or decades) of repairs to return to functionality, while others were outright destroyed.
Having the various races cut off from each other because their local Relays are too damaged, or having access to only a corner of the network available, would have radically shifted the entire power balance of the Milky Way. Such a scenario would have made for a good jumping off point, a couple hundreds years down the line, to see what the aftermath was.
Would have also allowed us to have new species be introduced, as the lore already established the Relay network in the Milky Way was not fully explored, owing to the Council being too afraid to travel through dormant Relays to avoid another Rachni incident. There might have potentially been other races out there during the time of the original trilogy that we never knew about, owing to them being located off-the-grid from the rest of the galaxy?
I was wondering: how does that even work exactly? If we unlock a relay, we're now exposed to RGB. A new relay couldn't solve this issue.
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who feels that way.
BioWare designed TMW with a particular set of species and conflicts as the setting for the Shepard trilogy. What they built in to that world ran its course in the events of the trilogy, which is complete.
In order to continue, they need to do a lot more world building - which may as well be done in another galaxy.
Holy Limited Imagination.
On hundred Billion (100,000,000,000) unexplored stars in the Milky Way, never mind how many planets that number of systems may contain, not enough potential?
The sad fact is that there is obviously more than enough real estate left in the Milky Way for any number of follow on s, it's just that the terrible writing decisions of ME3, compounded by the ensuing decision to not canonize any one ending or use some other plot device like indoctrination, left them with no plausible setting, excepting an entirely new galaxy.
Exceptionally sad in that they had a pre-packaged course all set up with a destroy or refuse ending leading to a new Milky Way cycle containing Liara's Beacons and all the information in them on this cycles' successes and failures, and how to defeat the Reapers. That is just one out of many possible courses that could have left the franchise in the largely unexplored MW, with new characters, and still containing all the fan favorite storylines they spent a decade developing.
Bad writing and strategic vision do not equal lack of potential in an entire galaxy.
The only option is to have a super hidden away even OLDER precursor society that somehow went extinct before the Reapers and no one found it, or invaders from another galaxy, but the MW is dead.
Well that is sort of an option though.
The last option is to basically have a parallel society that evolved around the same time as the Citadel, but we know that's basically nonsense because Citadel space is huge. A parallel society developing for 50,000 years that no one happened to find until AFTER ME3 is more contrived than anything MEA does.
I don't see that as completely impossible either.
It's contrived. This all just happens to get discovered - and just happens to kick off the next apocalypse - just when the Reapers are done? It's silly. It's no less contrived than MEA, which is absolutely contrived, and that's my point: there's no way to continue a setting designed to support a single main story when you told that story without getting contrived.Well that is sort of an option though.
I don't see that as completely implausible either.
It's contrived. This all just happens to get discovered - and just happens to kick off the next apocalypse - just when the Reapers are done? It's silly.
It might be silly or contrived but it's not beyond the imagination, or, my imagination.
Although I don't know... not even sure contrived per se, highly advanced or evolved societies spring up basically right underneath people's noses sometimes IRL.
Have to say, I was thinking about this thread and one thought really crystallised in my mind, a bit like an icy blast. We are never going back and need to realise that the past is in the past. So really we should all just let it go.
*Puts finger to von ubers' lips.* Shh. No, no. Shhhhh.
Have to say, I was thinking about this thread and one thought really crystallised in my mind, a bit like an icy blast. We are never going back and need to realise that the past is in the past. So really we should all just let it go.
So here is a plot concept:
1) Reapers are unstoppable. The ending of ME 3 is about "how" you survive extinction not how you beat the Reapers. The game ends with you and your loved one (companions) making a fire in a cave - the Normandy sitting derelict outside, covered in foliage.
2) The Council decides that the only way to weather the storm is to follow the path of the Protheans, but do it right.
3) The galaxy enters a blackout of 400 years. No electricity, no science fiction, no nothing. The knowledge is kept - but the galaxy goes quiet.
4) 400 years later. Mass Effect 4 is a "re-discovery" of the galaxy.
Would that have been fun?
This sounds like a Final Fantasy or Might and Magic premise. Start off in a fantasy setting and as we advance we discover ancient technology that leads to the discovery of some world-ending threat that's lain dormant.
Complaining about not keep exploring the Milky Way or why we moving to Andromeda is a new level of crazy on this forums.
Really where is the problem about leaving the Milky Way. It open alot of potential for new stories.
You just need to go and watch SG to see how much potential there is about moving to a new galaxy.
Like what the hell are we gonna do if there's no Quarian booty and the only Asari in your squad is an Asaru.
I keep seeing Asaru, is that something made up by fans?
Retour en haut