Eh, I'm leaning towards "new galaxy" at this point for the next Mass Effect so I doubt it'll cause trouble for them.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Mass Effect Community Thread
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
- Status
Eh, I'm leaning towards "new galaxy" at this point for the next Mass Effect so I doubt it'll cause trouble for them.
DOWN
Banned
While there's nothing wrong with Gears of War style, it really felt out of place in that mission. It felt like it was making you stuck in areas and lost the exciting push that ME usually lets you do toward enemies with lots of active powers.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
It was just so bad and bland. I also hated the emphasis being so much on earth and not the Galaxy. It was also obvious that the holographoc squadmates were so badly shooed in. Which is what Weakes said.
prag16
Banned
I see this from a lot of people, hating emphasis on Earth or on humans in general. The Mass Effect games have a lot of locales and races. I don't have an issue with the amount of humans, or time spent on earth. We spend a few hours on earth out of 20-30. I'm okay with that.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
On earth not being a problem, but the whole shift in it being about earth and it being at the end was the problem.
prag16
Banned
Meh. I know people complain about Earth/humans being more important than other planets/races in this and other sci-fi. Never bothered me. As I said there's enough variety to differentiate it from random military badass Gears of Duty.
BrassDragon
Member
Because Shepard's legacy looms large over the Milky Way.
If you set the new story before the events of ME3, all your accomplishments are overshadowed by the galactic threat Shepard is fighting of screen. They also didn't leave much room in the timeline to explore historical events in an interesting and satisfying manner (see the lukewarm reaction to pitches about the First Contact war.)
If you set it after M3, you have to deal with the repercussions of three wildly divergent endings that aren't, erm, universally accepted by the fanbase.
A new galaxy sidesteps all that. It's not that we don't love / understand the scale of the original galaxy, it's just that BioWare managed to break its own setting in the eyes of many people. It's the best way to do a soft reboot.
Good points. It's just that another galaxy would be so incredibly far away and I wonder what they'd come up with to travel that far what with the relays being destroyed and all.
BrassDragon
Member
There's been a lot of speculation on this concept upthread and on the BioWare boards.
The most accepted ideas seem to be: 1) the 'Ark variant' where the player is part of an exploration / colonisation fleet sent beyond the Milky Way to establish a new civilisation while the Reapers end the old one; 2) the 'Odyssey variant', where the player is part of an expeditionary force caught in a glitch / accident that sends them beyond the known Galaxy where they have to find their way back.
The Artisan
Member
If it is a new galaxy, then that could also mean being set thousands of years into the future, for humans to have traveled to other galaxies. That is if this galaxy has humans or the main character will even be human.
BrassDragon
Member
Certainly possible... but likely? We already know the Mako plays a huge part and looks more or less the way it looked in ME1 - that doesn't seem to imply a far future.
crazy monkey
Banned
I recently finished the game. I dunno what was wrong about ending. I liked it. All three of them.
for me M1>Me3>>>Me2
Me2 was jsut bad. mission after mission of shooting and no customization. took away all the fun.
Me 1 is classic. I am citadel is just amazing. I wish other two game had citadel like this. i felt like badass space leader in this game.
Me3 is good game too. quite a few things to do. one really wrong thing about the game is side game on computer or multiplayer you have to play to get the good ending..
Over alli am satisfied with my 29.99 i spent on this.
I really wish me4 to be more like me1*me3 not like me 2. I want to feel like i am in future where gun do not need ammo. and everything is over the top plus i want to explore the planet on crazy vehicles. I do not give shit about multiplayer.
for me M1>Me3>>>Me2
Me2 was jsut bad. mission after mission of shooting and no customization. took away all the fun.
Me 1 is classic. I am citadel is just amazing. I wish other two game had citadel like this. i felt like badass space leader in this game.
Me3 is good game too. quite a few things to do. one really wrong thing about the game is side game on computer or multiplayer you have to play to get the good ending..
Over alli am satisfied with my 29.99 i spent on this.
I really wish me4 to be more like me1*me3 not like me 2. I want to feel like i am in future where gun do not need ammo. and everything is over the top plus i want to explore the planet on crazy vehicles. I do not give shit about multiplayer.
The Artisan
Member
how then could you think it could take place in another galaxy?
maybe they discover how to amplify the mass relays' power, or find one in the milky way that's substantially more powerful than the rest, designed to shoot you to other galaxies.
Gumbie
Member
How dare you.
The Artisan
Member
aside from performance issues, I just wish Me2 did more story missions instead of having the game depend almost entirely on integrating your squad.
still love it though. My #1/#2 (goes back and forth with Uc2).
crazy monkey
Banned
I just did. all i did in me 2 was shoot and get team. no choices that felt important.
All they have to do to allow travel to a new galaxy is state that they found a new Mass Relay which links to another Galaxy, voila. Afterall, Mass Relays are massless corridors through space time so it wouldn't take any longer to travel to another galaxy than to any other system connected to a Mass Relay. Of course, I am still vehemently against introducing a whole other galaxy due to the sheer size of our own galaxy and the fact that it seems like an unnecessary extreme to essentially reboot the series. But, it could easily be explained.
crazy monkey
Banned
also it might be unpopular opinion but game ended fine. let it sleep. create brand new game not me4 reason being it will limit creativity. The team can do something different.
I'm not necessarily in favor of this either, but mass relays in other galaxies would mean the Reapers have been there. Maybe there would be other Reapers that didn't get hit by the space magic? Again, not crazy about it. I personally hope they just hit the reset button. Same galaxy, same species, same tech, etc but the events of ME 1-3 never took place. Let that trilogy be it's own thing, move on and explore other facets of the Mass Effect universe without Shepard's story being able to impact the new games at all.
The Artisan
Member
100% agree. keeping the whole setting limited to the milky way is part of what made ME a believable fictional universe.
however, I thought mass relays had a specific and coordinated amount of power. the distance to another galaxy would need tons more than the system of mass relays within just 1 galaxy. but at the same time like you suggested, it's as easy as introducing a super mass relay if they it fitting to do something like that.
the idea of reapers elsewhere outside around the halo of the milky way galaxy makes me think they could explore the origins of the reapers even more. but I feel like they wouldn't want to bring up any of that for the new installment.
Exactly, it adds more needless complexity to the series. Now, there's nothing to say that they couldn't travel to other galaxies. The Reapers have been around for Millions of years, they could have taken the time to go to another galaxy. But, then the question becomes why?
The Artisan
Member
that question was never satisfactorily answered for the ME trilogy, either.
Lol what? Are you truly believing that?
Gotta keep that dream alive, right?
To prevent the organics in other galaxies from being wiped out by synthetics of course. >_< No matter how one looks at it Bioware really messed up the motive for the Reaper's actions.
There are a couple options for the future:
A) Continue from the ME3 storyline, Reapers play no part in the story other then a "Hey remember when?" This could play out in the Milky Way or another galaxy
B) Continue from the ME3 storyline, the Reapers continue to be antagonists (this sounds like a dead end). This could play out in the Milky Way or another galaxy
C) Reboot the entire franchise, the Reapers play a similar role as they did in the original trilogy but things play out differently. In what way? Hopefully without a God Child.
D) Reboot the entire franchise without the Reapers, mass relays and other things are explained through other means
This isn't a definitive list, but it's what came to mind.
RagingPhoenix
Neo Member
Yeah I too think they could go with a new galaxy.
IIRC in one of those first screenshots, wasn't the bloke looking into a different galaxy map at the CIC? It didn't looked like milky way at all.
Ivory Samoan
Gold Member
I'm going with A), mos def.
That's not how Mass Relays work. They don't "shoot you".
You need 2 relays for every journey. One at the departure end, and one at the receiving.
Also, they could just say they found a stable wormhole or something.
No, she wasn't. You can have your fan theory all you want, but it is official that Shepard was not indoctrinated.
The Reapers are done, they fucked them up beyond belief. Leave that shit in the past and move on. I would honestly be shocked if the Reapers get more than a cursory mention.
Ganzlinger
Member
A) or D)
To be honest, I think the franchise could be a lot better if the Reapers were the enemy only in the first entry. I'd rather deal with aliens like Saren or organizations like Cerberus than this whole godly beings like Reapers.
Gumbie
Member
My feature request to Mac would be to leave and call Drew Karpyshyn in.
SliChillax
Member
Ouch, I would say proper animations.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Yep. Bring back the dark energy.
I hear a lot of people dismiss it and say it would have been worse than what we got or only slightly better, but when I heard about that I was actually intrigued and feel that if used properly it could make for a very good story.
RagingPhoenix
Neo Member
Please avoid the previous morality system like a plague and try to come up with something else.
Frontal nudity?
In a more serious tone, I hope they make conversations matter more in ME4. Too many conversations in Inquisition didn't have the cinematic style that we're used to in Bioware games. Most of them involved your character standing there like a lemon with no facial expressions talking to an NPC with no facial expressions in the game's 3rd person camera. I realize this would have required a ton of work, but I feel it would have fleshed the whole world out significantly more.
The Artisan
Member
omega 4 didn't have a receptive relay. and yeah I know you they don't straight up shoot you from place to place to place that's just sometimes what it appears to be in-game.
yeah, it'd be cool to see how they'd incorporate wormholes into the ME lore.
BrassDragon
Member
Hey, you're right... this isn't shown anywhere, never noticed that.
But how then does the Normandy return post-suicide mission? Or how do the Collectors shuttle between the colonies and their base?
Ahh, the magic of Mass Effect.
You likely got the extended ending for ME3 which isn't quite as horrendous as the original. Still plenty of stuff to complain about.
The original ending was something else. I was in disbelief for several day after how crappy it was.
prag16
Banned
What we got could have been good if used properly too. The execution was a dumpster fire. Dark energy with such a dumpster fire for execution would still have been a dumpster fire. Mac is awful. I'd definitely feel better if he wasn't involved. He should have been fired over that ending debacle.
If not for how bad it was, for the supposed fact that he and Hudson allegedly shut out the rest of the writers and produced their schlock with zero peer review.
jediyoshi
Member
You just played it? As in the game ending you got and are referring to wasn't even remotely close to the opinions you're comparing yours to?
prag16
Banned
People who played it at launch were generally harder on the endings. Obviously no EC/Leviathan is a factor, but the people who are just playing it now are likely to have less invested (both in terms of time and emotions) in the trilogy leading to easier acceptance of the endings.
Don't really care so much now. Just want ME4 to be great, whatever form it takes.
The Artisan
Member
i think it's got something to with the normandy's mass effect core.
They engaged it to escape both the derelict reaper and the collectors the second time.
shinobi602
Member
1)It's been 3 years since we last got a Mass Effect game. Next year will be 4 years.
2)Now that the trilogy is over, they're not tied to the Shepard arc. There are limitless possibilities in the ME universe.
3)Bioware is also working on a new IP
SliChillax
Member
I wasn't a fan of the ending but I honestly didn't care all that much (played it at release). I just can't get angry about a game I had so much fun with because the ending isn't what I wanted. In this case it really was journey over destination. When "An end once and for all" started playing I didn't think about the ending itself at all but about all the great moments leading up to it and all the characters I became so invested in over the course of the series. It was one of the most emotional moments I had playing games so far.
I'm actually playing through the entire series again at the moment and I have to say that I don't see the problem with restricted freedom/customization and too much shooting at all.
People seem to forget that ME1 had a whole lot of shooting as well, but there was just less content overall. Some of it wasn't even that great. A lot of the sidequests take place in random, nondescript compounds, filled with enemies that like to bumrush you. On Feros the sidesstuff is just a bunch of fetchquests. You go to a rather dull looking area, shoot a bunch of stuff, activate/destroy/pick up something and that's it. And while the Citadel is indeed fairly large, there isn't all that much to do there. Mass Effect 2 has quite a few sidequest that don't involve combat at all, in fact you don't fire a single shot in two of the loyalty missions.
As far as customization goes, yes, there is more gear in ME1 than in the other two games, but I already had fairly decent stuff rather early in the game and you get a ton of junk loot that's kind of a pain to get rid off (I had so much omnigel by the time I was done). I would have prefered it if they had built on that rather than streamlining it but I don't think it was worse.
The advantages ME1 does have, is that it introduces you into this amazing universe (so many exposition dumps during conversations), it has great antagonists with Saren/Sovereign and a great ending. ME2 has an almost episodic structure since most of the recruitment/loyalty missions have their own narrative that's not directly tied to the main story which I personally like a lot.
In the end I have a hard time ranking these games because I think they're all fantastic. I appreciate that there isn't a lot of fluff in them, something that Inquisition suffers from imho. I still like Inquisition but I do hope they won't go down that path too far for ME4. I'd rather have a 20-30 hour long game of quality content than a game like Inquisition where I end up with 80-100 hours but most of that is spent running around doing fetchquests or picking up collectibles.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
For me, it was the fact that the ending gave a giant middle finger to that.
The journey is always important, but when the destination tells you that the journey didn't matter then you appreciate the journey a whole lot less.
- Status