Listen in this case means "acknowledge and respond to appropriately." Not "listen and half-ass things without acknowledging the problem".jehk said:
Could Bioware be pulling a Nier with the next Mass Effect?
- Thread starter Infernai
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What I see there is 13% chose ME3, hardly enough to for it to be a majority considering you can mash any two of the ones ranking #2(The Walking Dead) to #8 (Far Cry 3), and get a result higher than #1.jehk said:
OT: I really think Pulling an Elder Scrolls would be the easiest out for Mass Effect, making that-which-must-not-be-named either irrelevant or so far in the past that it's only mentioned in the broadest of terms.
Some people wanted something else, sure - but originally some of the most frequent questions were things like "How did the squad get back on the Normandy?", "Why did Joker fly away?" and "Does everyone die on the new planet?"Devoneaux said:
The people who were asking those questions did have their questions answered by the EC. Is everyone happy? No, obviously not - but you can't pretend that they didn't address a good number of questions and concerns.
people seem to think that it's impossible for them, to make a straight up sequal that can work with the endings, I disagree
mostly due to the fact that if you think about it, it's just a few changes in dialogue and maybe a few aesthetic changes here and there, 90 percent of the content could remain relatively the same through all three endings, assuming that this is new, original content that doesn't necessarily rely on events from the previous games, like going to planets untouched in the first three games
and when they have to revisit places and concepts, they don't need to change much, Destroy ending: everything a little bit shabby, plus no geth, Control Ending: everything is clean and orderly, you see the occasional Reaper patrolling the skies, Synthesis: same as Control, but everyone has green eyes, maybe make this ending have more advanced equipment available to you
in terms of the survival of the Geth and the effect the Reapers' survival could have on galactic defense, it could cause complications but if they make the game big enough and varied enough, I think they could pull it off
mostly due to the fact that if you think about it, it's just a few changes in dialogue and maybe a few aesthetic changes here and there, 90 percent of the content could remain relatively the same through all three endings, assuming that this is new, original content that doesn't necessarily rely on events from the previous games, like going to planets untouched in the first three games
and when they have to revisit places and concepts, they don't need to change much, Destroy ending: everything a little bit shabby, plus no geth, Control Ending: everything is clean and orderly, you see the occasional Reaper patrolling the skies, Synthesis: same as Control, but everyone has green eyes, maybe make this ending have more advanced equipment available to you
in terms of the survival of the Geth and the effect the Reapers' survival could have on galactic defense, it could cause complications but if they make the game big enough and varied enough, I think they could pull it off
This is one of the more logical options and something I told my friends when we were talking about ME after 3 came out.omicron1 said:
By setting a new Mass Effect in the far future they can easily remove some of the big parts of the original trilogy and start with a relatively clean slate. Major plot points can be fudged a bit as the fog of time has crept in, though this depends on how far into the future you go. By setting the game, say, two thousand years after ME3 one can make a lot of things blurry as hell. In fact, make the current Council ambitious and actively suppressing history for personal gain. That itself can be worked into a more local and relatable plot involving crime, corruption, etc. The player gets caught up in it all somehow thus having a more humble origin than Shepard who was a seasoned soldier at ME's start. With Council corruption some of the main antagonists could even be Specters. Nothing about saving the galaxy but stopping only a handful of people, thus making it a smaller threat in a way. I could go into more detail but I'll just leave it at this for now and its only one idea me and my mates have be bouncing around.
Again, setting it in the far future frees the designers from many constraints the original trilogy could bring. Hell it could even be a simple matter of relevance for the characters in game. "Oh, the Reapers. Yeah...that was what, 2000 years ago? Why bring that up?", etc.
Putting the world-changing concepts of synthesis and whether or not the Reapers are still around aside, they'd still have to account for the potential extinction of the Geth and Quarians, as well as the fallout with the Krogan depending on the Genophage outcomes.I Max95 said:
I'd rather Bioware start with a clean slate. Let them create something without having to accommodate for variables.
I don't really see them 'pulling a Nier' as you put it.
At most... I'd say they might pull a Legacy of Kain.
Let me explain...
In the original game, Blood Omen 1, back when they thought it was the only game they were going to make out of this, they gave the player one of two choices... Either A) sacrifice themselves to restore the world's balance, or B) Refuse the sacrifice and doom the world to an eternity of decay.
Ending B. turned out to be the canon ending... and they, arguably, retconned A so that it would have actually resulted in a far worse state of things than B. (don't worry, they fully justify it within the context of the series... did I mention that this is a series about time travel and vampires? And... proper vampires, by the way, not the Twilight imitation brand)
Point is, the Legacy of Kain series was a rare series in which the first game's 'bad ending' was canon, and they rolled with its consequences and spent the rest of the series having the two main characters at first trying to prevent it from happening (they quickly give up on that), and later trying to fix or at least mitigate the damage that ending B entailed. (Did I mention that Simon Templeman and the late Tony Jay are in this series?)
So, basically, what I see happening is that Bioware will pick one of ME3's endings as cannon and go with that, and explore its consequences. This approach would be much more manageable from a writer's perspective.
Either that... or they'll pull an Invisible War (the often maligned sequel to Deus Ex), which sort of had all of the original's endings happening at the same time... at least partially in each case. Not saying this approach won't work, but as Invisible War proved... its tricky to get it right without pissing off a lot of fans.
Ideally though?
I'd like to see a game that either takes place in the universe's far future or far past.
As in... either A) playing as the relatively distant inheritors of the universe... or a previous race that fell to the Reapers, like the Protheans or one even older that we haven't met yet.
EDIT:
Actually, THE IDEAL situation is if Bioware handed their universe over to someone else... like say... Obsidian, who have repeatedly proven they can write much deeper, more interesting stories than Bioware can. Bioware may good with dialogue... but when it comes to writing... Obsidian's better at everything else involved in telling a story.
At most... I'd say they might pull a Legacy of Kain.
Let me explain...
In the original game, Blood Omen 1, back when they thought it was the only game they were going to make out of this, they gave the player one of two choices... Either A) sacrifice themselves to restore the world's balance, or B) Refuse the sacrifice and doom the world to an eternity of decay.
Ending B. turned out to be the canon ending... and they, arguably, retconned A so that it would have actually resulted in a far worse state of things than B. (don't worry, they fully justify it within the context of the series... did I mention that this is a series about time travel and vampires? And... proper vampires, by the way, not the Twilight imitation brand)
Point is, the Legacy of Kain series was a rare series in which the first game's 'bad ending' was canon, and they rolled with its consequences and spent the rest of the series having the two main characters at first trying to prevent it from happening (they quickly give up on that), and later trying to fix or at least mitigate the damage that ending B entailed. (Did I mention that Simon Templeman and the late Tony Jay are in this series?)
So, basically, what I see happening is that Bioware will pick one of ME3's endings as cannon and go with that, and explore its consequences. This approach would be much more manageable from a writer's perspective.
Either that... or they'll pull an Invisible War (the often maligned sequel to Deus Ex), which sort of had all of the original's endings happening at the same time... at least partially in each case. Not saying this approach won't work, but as Invisible War proved... its tricky to get it right without pissing off a lot of fans.
Ideally though?
I'd like to see a game that either takes place in the universe's far future or far past.
As in... either A) playing as the relatively distant inheritors of the universe... or a previous race that fell to the Reapers, like the Protheans or one even older that we haven't met yet.
EDIT:
Actually, THE IDEAL situation is if Bioware handed their universe over to someone else... like say... Obsidian, who have repeatedly proven they can write much deeper, more interesting stories than Bioware can. Bioware may good with dialogue... but when it comes to writing... Obsidian's better at everything else involved in telling a story.
No.
EA isn't that smart to have this as it's original plan. The next ME will be set in the past, or ignore the ending cluster-fuck.
EA isn't that smart to have this as it's original plan. The next ME will be set in the past, or ignore the ending cluster-fuck.
And even that is ignoring the fact that in synthesis and control the reapers share all the knowledge of the races that lived before them (rewatching all of them it turns out this is not explicitly stated in control, but I have no reason to not believe Space Jesus Shepard would share the knowledge), causing a cultural and scientific Renaissance of unimaginable size. There is no way to move forward in Mass Effect other than resorting to head cannon.Mikejames said:
yeah, but those variables are exactly what everyone is so upset about, ask a begrudged Mass Effect fan one thing they hated about the ending, and often they will say that their "choices didn't matter" making an entire game centered around exploring the galaxy crafted by Shepard's decisions would fix that problem.Mikejames said:
I imagine the next game will be something like ME2, a crew of mostly new characters exploring the galaxy and facing a threat significantly smaller than usual, not involving destruction on a galactic scale. imagine if the Geth or the Quarians were already dead when ME2 comes around, enough would change for it to matter, but not enough to fundamentally alter the experience
and about the Reapers, I'll admit I don't actually know much about what exactly happened in the ending regarding that, but Bioware could spin that to their advantage and give an explaination that works for a new game, for example, the Reapers remain alive, but don't directly involve themselves in anything to make sure they don't start another war, only coming out to fight threats on a galactic scale
synthesis well, I think we're all a little confused by that one, the only thing that makes it different from the Control ending appears to be that everyone now has green eyes, and are smarter somehow
Well, sticking with my Destroy headcanon would make things simpler, but I don't see Bioware declaring a canon outcome.godofslack said:
I'll have to object. One of the issues with ME3 was that there were just too many variables to account for to make suitably diverse stories. We're talking about multiple major/minor choices acknowledged over a full trilogy, so imagine how thin they would have to spread development if they were accommodating for several major choices right from the start.I Max95 said:
The implications of Rannoch, Tuchanka, and the final decision are disparate enough that Bioware wouldn't be able to do anything substantial with at least three races, and forcing everyone to be half-synthetic would have to have some noticeable impact.
I just want them to avoid something unnecessarily watered down.
I just finished the game recently with the extended cut so I'm not bitter like some of you, and imagining possible continuations for each ending is actually getting me kind of excited.
On the one hand destroy has Shepard alive, but Bioware has stated that you won't be playing as "Shepard" (or anyone like him, which is a really nonsensical statement considering he's completely customizable...) but I think that at least guarantees that you won't be playing as Shepard, so there's no need to have him alive. It does leave everything open for the whole cycle being repeated thing though.
A control continuation would be interesting, with god Shepard acting as the villain.
Synthesis could have some kind of rebel group disliking the idea of being forced into synthesis and wanting to separate organics and synthetics.
Refusal wipes the slate clean pretty much letting Bioware do whatever they want in a similar setting with the same powers and stuff.
Worst case gameplay-wise though - multiplayer was some kind of testing ground and the new game will be some kind of multiplayer focused Diablo style dungeon crawling loot grind.
On the one hand destroy has Shepard alive, but Bioware has stated that you won't be playing as "Shepard" (or anyone like him, which is a really nonsensical statement considering he's completely customizable...) but I think that at least guarantees that you won't be playing as Shepard, so there's no need to have him alive. It does leave everything open for the whole cycle being repeated thing though.
A control continuation would be interesting, with god Shepard acting as the villain.
Synthesis could have some kind of rebel group disliking the idea of being forced into synthesis and wanting to separate organics and synthetics.
Refusal wipes the slate clean pretty much letting Bioware do whatever they want in a similar setting with the same powers and stuff.
Worst case gameplay-wise though - multiplayer was some kind of testing ground and the new game will be some kind of multiplayer focused Diablo style dungeon crawling loot grind.
Technically they've already done it with ME2 - the 3rd game won't acknowledge your ME2 save if Shepard dies so that particular version of the ME2 ending is noncanon.AD-Stu said:
The only way I can see them pulling off a sequel is if it's set so far in the future that the endings do not matter in the long run. Or better yet, in ANOTHER galaxy nearby the Milky Way. A new, even faster traveling technology has been found and you play one of the brave few to go out and explore this new frontier on the behalf of Citadel space. What you encounter is unknown, so you take the best of the best with you. And then you discover a galaxy populated almost entirely by A.I.'s or some such, I don't know. But the key point is that it's far enough in the future that the consequences of the last game aren't immediately noticeable, kind of like how they had Atton Rand detail what happened in KotOR II to the Exile and you corrected him/corroborated with him on what happened in your game(before game save transfers and the like).
Besides, a prequel during the First Contact War would be not only predictable but boring. Humanity was in it's infancy concerning armor and weapons, and the heat sinks would be back as well. Hell they didn't even have Biotics yet, it would be a step back gameplay-wise in my head. On the other hand, a strategy-rpg like XCOM: Enemy Unknown would be awesome with the ability to recruit different species with inherent traits for missions and the like. But knowing EA, they'll have them shovel out a damn near "guaranteed" cookie cutter sequel in a years time.
I think Dragon Age III will be the last game I get from Bioware under EA at this point. It was nice knowing you Bioware, I'll miss ya.
Besides, a prequel during the First Contact War would be not only predictable but boring. Humanity was in it's infancy concerning armor and weapons, and the heat sinks would be back as well. Hell they didn't even have Biotics yet, it would be a step back gameplay-wise in my head. On the other hand, a strategy-rpg like XCOM: Enemy Unknown would be awesome with the ability to recruit different species with inherent traits for missions and the like. But knowing EA, they'll have them shovel out a damn near "guaranteed" cookie cutter sequel in a years time.
I think Dragon Age III will be the last game I get from Bioware under EA at this point. It was nice knowing you Bioware, I'll miss ya.
It's not as hard as people think. just have it set a few decades in the future (so old characters can still have their obligatory cameos) and just have people say "Commander Shepard stopped the Reapers" and leave it at that. Even if people didn't hate the series, no sense dwelling on things when there's new stuff to be done.
It would be interesting to see how veterans of the franchise react to the racism present at that time: (almost) everyone loves Garrus and Mordin, but most humans during the First Contact War probably thought differently about aliens. It might make for an interesting dynamic, and even explore the racist phenomenon.Adam Jensen said:
Since when did making a prequel become impossible because you already know it ends? Didn't we all know Anikan was going to turn into Vader? Didn't we all know how GoW Judgement was going to end? Since every prequel is - by definition - something that comes after the original but is set before the original, don't we already know how most every prequl will end?Infernai said:
If you ask me, the biggest problem that ME faces with making a prequel is the simple fact of time. At least if they're wanting you to play as a human main character again, the humans have only been on the galactic map (so to speak) for little over 20 years. After the First Contact War (which could be a setting for a possible prequel) the only other major conflict other than the Skillian Blitz (which Hero Shep defeats singlehandedly) that the Alliance has been in is the Reaper War. So unless they intend to let you play as a race other than human and set the game before Humanity's rise, there really isn't much of anything to make a prequel out of.
As for making a sequel, you'd think that'd be quite challenging as, depending on your favorite color out of Red, Blue, or Green, the galaxy could be a VERY different place.
With Red, the Geth have been wiped out along with the Reapers, though there's a chance Shepard survived in the galaxy that is rebuilding itself ad its technology after the war. Not that Shepard's survival matters seeing as how they've stated that Shepard's part in the games is over.
With Blue, Shepard has effectively become a god and is in complete control of the Reapers, using them as a galactic police force to keep the peace.
Annnnnd if you went with Green, the galaxy has become a boring utopia with everyone happily getting along with one another as they're all effectively the same on the inside.
With Blue, Shepard has effectively become a god and is in complete control of the Reapers, using them as a galactic police force to keep the peace.
Annnnnd if you went with Green, the galaxy has become a boring utopia with everyone happily getting along with one another as they're all effectively the same on the inside.
all they need to do is acknowledge that our decisions mattered, they don't need to change the game on some profound level, the problem with ME3 was that they acknowledged very few of our choices in previous games, kill or free the Rachni, doesn't matter we're still fighting Rachni, rewrite or destroy the heretic Geth, doesn't matter they joined the Reapers anyway, it was stuff like that that frustrated players even before the endingMikejames said:
it was Bioware spinning our choices in such a way in order to basically eliminate consequence in all but a few instances, i'm not saying they should do the same thing in the next game, all i'm saying is that these Choices don't have to wildly change the game, Bioware could put a new spin on things and make it so that one person could play through the consequences of the Destroy ending while another could do the COntrol ending, while both of them are essentially playing the same game
Many people were unhappy with plot holes and such, and many of those issues were addressed with the Extended Cut. So, to many, BioWare gave a lot of what they wanted. Just not to everyone. But anyone who believed that BioWare would make significant changes to the story itself was seriously deluded. That rarely, if ever, happens with any piece of art, however flawed, and certainly not with a piece that was such a big critical and commercial success.Devoneaux said:
The Extended Cut did show that BioWare cares. In a way, they did what they could without relinquishing authorship.
As, well, bewildered as I was about the ferocity of the ending controversy, I just hope that something good comes out of it: That developers pay more attention to the consistency of their story, its narrative and its themes.
To simply change whether or not everyone's eyes had a green tint to differ between Destroy and Synthesis wouldn't be enough. If they were going make a direct sequel acting like these decisions mattered, they would have to be big changes because there are big differences. I don't want the Krogans and Quarians completely written out of the next story because they're potentially dieing off in other people's saves.I Max95 said:
I'd like another Mass Effect game that feels tailored to our personal choices, but I just don't see it realistically happening directly after ME3. There's less restrictions and more potential in starting with a new story that's not already bogged down by years of player choices.