Mass Effect 4 Will Not Feature Shepard or "Shepard 2"

[Diana Kingston-Gabai]

That carries its own set of problems though, the history of the universe is fairly well documented in the trilogy. That would mean a massive shift away from the epic ground breaking choices we saw throughout Mass Effect because big events are already fixed in history.

The choices in the new series would have to step around those or go for huge amounts of retcon. Could the new series survive the controversy that would bring?

I don't think that's necessarily true - we may know the broad strokes of what happened during the Rachni War, for example, but dramatizing them (and scaling them down so it's about specific people rather than The Fate of the Galaxy) could lead to a very engaging story.

 

[DioWallachia]

This time, the Shep Brick will be..............yellow.

But seriously, what universe? they can barely be consistent in their writting and now they expect to pick one of the flawed endings and make it cannon?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

But who would buy it at this point, after so much fail on 3?

My thoughts as well - after the way 3 ended, how many people are going to be willing to trust Bioware on another series of Mass Effect games?
"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice..."

Um, what are you talking about?

A lot of people, even those who didn't like the ending, consider Mass Effect 3 to be the Game of the Year. Yeah, the last ten minutes were ass, but the rest of the game was solid gold.

OT: Mass Effect 4? Consider me Pre-Ordered. I particularly like the idea that we're moving away from a military character.

Any chance we can play as a Scientist Salarian?

 

[N_of_the_dead]

In Deus Ex: Invisible War, they combined the endings without revealing the order in which they happened (the first being the one chosen by the player). It's not a very good way of making a sequel, but it's an option. As I said, I prefer that it won't take place after ME3.

I honestly forgot about the ending to Invisible War thank you for reminding me about that.

Though it would be kind of impossible to mix these three since destroy + synthesis equals end of sentient life if my understanding is right. I would take tip my hat to them if they could find a way to combine all of the endings into one cohesive event.

But I do agree with the prequel over sequel preference.

 

[RJ 17]

The thing is, if they go with a sequel, then based on the ending to ME 3 Shepard could still be around (in one form or another). And with those particular endings (Blue, specifically), it'll be pretty hard NOT to have Shepard be a major factor in any games that take place after the trilogy.

So if they're really trying to move away from Shepard as much as possible, they'd almost have to go with a prequel. It'll be interesting since they're saying that they don't want the protagonist to even be a soldier, because that rules out the possibility of a prequel set in any of the numerous wars that take place in ME's history. My best guess at this point: they'll try to go with some kind of "Crime Drama".

 

[crazyrabbits]

A lot of people, even those who didn't like the ending, consider Mass Effect 3 to be the Game of the Year. Yeah, the last ten minutes were ass, but the rest of the game was solid gold.

The only people I've seen make any reference to 3 as a GOTY contender are the fanboys on the BSN. The game dropped out of consideration for that honor long ago - even if the ending wasn't so bad, the massive amount of fail throughout the game, and its subsequent controversy, all but ensured it was shunned by over half the fanbase. Besides, we've still got 2 months before the end of the year, and Hitman Absolution/Halo 4 are already being talked up as big contenders everywhere.

There are several problems with creating a sequel to 3.

1) Circumstances/Decisions. Either the galaxy is comprised of half-green tech-human hybrids, the Reapers are still out there being controlled by Shepard, or that Shepard is possibly alive and the galaxy is fine. You can't integrate those disparate choices into a single continuity without making serious retcons (like the EC did) or having it be based on one set of choices (which would then nullify the whole point of making choices throughout the trilogy). BW sure wouldn't devote the time to making extra content to integrate all of these choices - they're under the thumb of EA now, to the point that their logo in the OP has been rebranded to show that they are well and truly a division now.

2) Threat Level: When you start with antagonists that are nigh-invulnerable machine gods that believe their justification for cleansing the galaxy is beyond comprehension, there are very few places you can go after that. The only thing that could have worked was the "tech singularity", and seeing how they swept that under the rug, that's not likely a potential storyline. Smaller-scale stories won't have the same impact as the first two games, and any new protagonist is going to be undeniably compared with Shepard. This is why it was such a foolish move to kill him off (in most cases) in 3.

3) Future Storylines: The majority of responses in this topic show that any future storyline would be gimped at best. A mercenary? A single commando? Come on! The ME trilogy involved the entire galaxy uniting to stop a common threat - these ideas sound like the franchise would be moving backwards. There is no interest in a new character going on a small-scale mission, especially when the odds and involvement were already hit their peak in the trilogy. The only thing they can really do are prequels, and if it's set during 3, it's going to be pointless.

I don't think BW has any idea what to do with their franchise, and EA is pushing their buttons - look at their upcoming releases. Propping up dead franchises (C&C, Ultima), DA2 set in one city, ME3 with severely limited hub worlds/locations, etc. They know people are still extremely unhappy with 3, and they've been trying to talk it up at every chance they get because they want to build interest again, which is pretty much non-existent outside the hardcore fanbase.

 

[Zydrate]

Not even a cameo or a mention?
That's too bad.

 

[FEichinger]

From ME1 to ME3 it went straight downhill (ME1 had an awesome story, just some gameplay issues every now and then, ME2 had absolutely nothing to do with and no impact whatsoever on the trilogy, and ME3 is ... well, ME3.) ...
Yep, I gave up on Mass Effect. Don't get me wrong, if they want to give a new character a shot (as they announced before Mess Effect 3 (pun intended)), all the power to them. But I doubt it'll get me anywhere close to touching the series ever again.

 

[fix-the-spade]

But who would buy it at this point, after so much fail on 3?

Except for twenty minutes at the end I thought 3 was fantastic. The final battle should have been a head on confrontation with Harbinger from the front seat of the SR-2, but the journey to get there was brilliant.

As for me, If they pick the middle ending (green?) as canon that would work. Then set number 4 as a much more conspiracy based, be a Merc in the Blue Suns or Omega based trader, finally the big bad is a (just one) Leviathan. Or just some plain dogmatic nutjob (or maybe humanity has developed a penchant for super weapons?). It would be quite cool to see the Mass Effect Universe with the Reapers in tow as a part of life rather than a menace.

But they'll fall into the stupid trap of making the Reapers the bad guys again and having another game of fighting Husks... so... er... nevermind.

 

[dubious_wolf]

this just in it will still suck.
Honestly... It's actually just a retired Shepard who changes his/her name and flies around space leisurely enjoying his/her anonymity. That's the thing about open blank slate characters. You say it's a different person. But if I make the character act the same way is it truly a different character?

 

[C117]

You know... as much as I love Shepard (or at least my version of her), I think this is a really good idea. Because really, the story of Shepard is over. She united all the races against the Reapers. She accomplished what no other person could do. She saved the galaxy. And then she sacrificed herself for a better cause (or did she? Hmm, hmm...).

So it only makes sense that they introduce some new guy to pick up the franchise. Heck, just because Shepard is no longer the focus of Mass Effect, doesn't mean that she will disappear from it. Perhaps you will get to know what ultimately became of the galaxy after Shepard made her decision (and wether she truly survived or not), or at least have her referenced at some point.

But enough about Shepard. What about this new berk we'll be playing as? I think Bioware should mix things up a bit, and instead of him being a human, make him a turian or something. Or just do the fantasy-RPG-thing and let us choose from a number of races.

Well, I think that would be interesting...

 

[DragonStorm247]

Hell, I want Mass Effect: Archangel.

 

[Fuhrlock]

Since Shepard was more a device for the player to experience the mass effect universe and interact with, the character his/her loss means very little to me. Really it comes down to how well they are able to explore the ME universe (easy to do since we have only scratched the surface of the workings of some of the most prevalent alien species so far soley based on how they have needed to react to humanity) and create interesting characters that ultimately will define this game as a sucess or failure. In bioware games a protagonist generally means very little to the enjoyment of the game, if Shepard can no longer be used as the device to tell the story any longer so be it so long as the new story/characters meet the previously set standards

 

[C117]

Hell, I want Mass Effect: Archangel.

Heh heh, yeah... I'd totally buy that.

 

[Issurru]

What I got from that. "the mass effect series is vast and very, very rich" = we hope it makes us very, very rich.
OT: somewhat excited. I loved the original trilogy and wasn't butthurt about the ending soi see no reason not to be somewhat excited

 

[DugMachine]

Well that's interesting. I thought this ME3 was the last Mass Effect though.. guess not. Would like it that way but the show must go on I guess.

Spoiler: No sherpard though...

Okay no Shepard protagonist, fair enough. But at least bring him back in some way. I want to know if he's actually alive or not god dammit.

 

[Therumancer]

Simply put if it's a prequel my interest is null. I tend to dislike prequels in general as they do more damage than sequels. Besides a proper sequel could potentially repair the damage done at the end of ME3. With the way ME3 ended I'll be honest in saying that other than a general dislike of prequels it also involves the feeling of futility, I mean nothing I accomplish matters because everything turns into a giant turd at the end.

As far as where they could go with the series, that's pretty much anywhere. How rich the Mass Effect universe was doesn't much matter when the developers have already proven they are willing to take a crap all over that, and "Mass Effect" is just a label to cram onto a science fiction franchise.

If anyone cared what I think (the people who make games generally don't) I'd think the ideal direction for a non-military Mass Effect game would be a apace sandbox, with some story missions thrown in. If civilization and intergalactic communication has been damaged after the end of the last game, it would be a great universe for a freebooter to slow-travel between systems, do mercenary work, and similar things. People seemed to enjoy making their own characters from various templates in the ME3 multi-player, so actually making this a game where you can create your own character, and perhaps your own crew/squad from scratch as opposed to recruting various pre-defined characters might work.

The odds of EA-Bioware getting behind anything space sim, or truely RPG like nowadays seems minimal, never mind a combination of the two.

One thing I do think a new Mass Effect game does need is to have both ground and space based action. I found it very annoying that despite having "the best ship in the fleet" and being told how great my weapons and stuff were, I never really got to do anything with my ship execept watch cinematics of Joker flying it. The thrill of say mounting a doom gun on my ship in Mass Effect 2 was heavily mitigated by the fact that all it really did was affect a later cinematic and a few later variables about crew survival in the endgame. It wasn't like "YEAH!, now I'm going to teach those space thugs who rules the spacelanes". In a space opera when I'm more excited about tweaking my pistol to be .02% more effective than I am with the gear on my ship, you know something is wrong, both should be appealing.

 

[Deshin]

My initial reaction is to scream betrayal "cash cow" but thinking about it logically I think it's a good move. The problem with Mass Effect was the whole game got so bogged down by number 3 that they really wrote themselves into a corner creatively.

You can tell the first game had balls. Only 6 squad members and AT LEAST 1 of them would die (with the other one tricky to keep alive on your first playthrough) and all the other choices which seemed to hint at larger things later on. Then come 2 they went all out and introduced a butt-load of characters and made it possible for ALL of them to die. This means they had to write up 3 with the possibility that the majority of the cast could be dead on your playthrough and no one wants to green light VAs for characters that half the player base isn't even going to see. Then of course the multiple plot points couldn't impact the series TOO heavily because then it'd be a gordian-flowchart and the pubs behind the scene said "ah fuck it make it a shooter with some fancy cutscenes".

The Mass Effect universe has some very good story behind it so perhaps the logical best step for a Mass Effect game to go back to roots is to do away with Shep and the scooby gang as best as they can. Perhaps throw the story back to the Krogan Rebellion or maybe even the First Contact Wars with the Turians and let us see firsthand what went on from the front lines.

EDIT: To give a good example of breaking away from the mold: (another space opera mind you) Star Wars. Sure we all know the story of Anakin Skywalker and those are what made it into the 6 movies but there are LOADS of other stories that are just as good. I mean take TOR for example, sure it flopped as an mmo but I absolutely LOVED the setting and the story of that game. I only played as a Bounty Hunter with a bit of dabbling into Agent before my 2 months were up and I looked at the resubcribe screen and said "fuck that" but the story from a non-Jedi perspective was really great.

So if we have a Mass Effect with the core focus shifted AWAY from the atypical Space Marine macho hero stereotype and have it from the eyes of someone less "oorah" it might give the series a much needed push in the right direction again

 

[Erttheking]

Well, at least the Commander's defiled corpse can rest in peace at the very least.

 

[BaronIveagh]

But who would buy it at this point, after so much fail on 3?

All of us who liked 3's ending, like me, or those of us who didn't care about the 10 less-than-good minutes at the end of a 3-game series. You guys are all whinier than Star Wars fans. Good grief.

Less-Than-Good? In much the same way that Genghis Khan was less-than-peaceful? Or Absolute Zero is less-than-warm?

As far as the Star Wars guys... After TOR I think they have grounds for some legitimate whining.