inherit
1227
0
3,668
Phantom
2,659
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on May 28, 2019 17:24:06 GMT
To Hrulj, Your Down Syndrome Dwarf quadreplegic double amputee transwoman boxer demisexual 7th wave feminist black supremacist will not be out of place within my idea of Paragon of Our Kind because they as a faction live off Insane Troll Logic and Extreme SJW behavior.
Side note: Paragon Of Our Kind is a Lethal Joke Character of a Faction.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,182
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,830
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on May 28, 2019 17:31:56 GMT
I think it's kind of too little too late for something like that. ME3's ending was the opportunity to give (surviving) Shepard that sendoff, and they missed it. I don't think it would really blow anyone's hair back to bring Shepard back just to do a lot of mundane stuff. And besides, I think that having Shepard return to being an errand-running infantryman after literally turning into Galactic Savior Supreme would be really unsatisfying. Like, really? We're just going to have the most decorated soldier in all of history survive an orbital blast from a relay go traipsing about the clusters fighting outlaws and alien scum for the Alliance or whoever? Nuts to that. I'd say that's grounds for early retirement from that bitch to get on with life and let someone not blown up multiple times take the reins.
Your point about Ryder doesn't change the point I'm making. This ain't a person whose innate abilities constrain the writers. They can do whatever they want with them. If a protagonist is handed the idiot ball to get the plot going, they're going to pass the idiot ball to anyone. Doesn't matter if it's Ryder, Shepard, the Warden, Inquisitor, whatever. If the writers unwittingly (or wittingly?) make a character stupid so that the antagonist gets the upper hand, you won't solve that problem by just swapping them out for [insert favorite character] instead. If they made Ryder fail, they'd make Shepard fail. Shepard's only true benefit is market appeal, and that's it. Everything else relies entirely on whether or not the writing team is up to snuff.
Oh jesus what the hell is it with people being stuck up on one thing. This isn't Shepard - the Minecraft one where the game is about building a dumb house on Rannoch, it was an example of how continuing from shepard can give the emotional ties and basis where building a home for Tali does indeed feel like an achievement since you spent years with her as crewmate or potentially lover. The game itself would be about exploring the galaxy, rebuilding the old and going into inactive relays. Far from an errand runner, he's a leader of an expedition, put at the head of it since it is a "cushy" position and he is a prestigious enough person that he brings respect wherever he goes. And its their choice to do so. Ryder doesn't matter whatsoever. There is not a single high value memorable character in Andromeda. There was no impact to the game itself. New Character won't fix it either. If there is a new character it'll probably be a down syndrome dwarf quadreplegic double amputee transwoman boxer demisexual 7th wave feminist black supremacist. Its where Bioware and it's writing is. And where EA is. Dont' care to see it really. You don't seem to have engaged with KaiserShep's actual point at all there. And honestly, whining about SJWs is kinda played, though at least you managed to avoid using the term itself.
|
|
Hrulj
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 263 Likes: 271
inherit
3276
0
Mar 19, 2023 16:55:53 GMT
271
Hrulj
263
February 2017
hrulj
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Hrulj on May 28, 2019 17:36:36 GMT
Oh jesus what the hell is it with people being stuck up on one thing. This isn't Shepard - the Minecraft one where the game is about building a dumb house on Rannoch, it was an example of how continuing from shepard can give the emotional ties and basis where building a home for Tali does indeed feel like an achievement since you spent years with her as crewmate or potentially lover. The game itself would be about exploring the galaxy, rebuilding the old and going into inactive relays. Far from an errand runner, he's a leader of an expedition, put at the head of it since it is a "cushy" position and he is a prestigious enough person that he brings respect wherever he goes. And its their choice to do so. Ryder doesn't matter whatsoever. There is not a single high value memorable character in Andromeda. There was no impact to the game itself. New Character won't fix it either. If there is a new character it'll probably be a down syndrome dwarf quadreplegic double amputee transwoman boxer demisexual 7th wave feminist black supremacist. Its where Bioware and it's writing is. And where EA is. Dont' care to see it really. You don't seem to have engaged with KaiserShep's actual point at all there. And honestly, whining about SJWs is kinda played, though at least you managed to avoid using the term itself. I addressed his points. And until Bioware gets it I don't see a reason for anyone to stop complaining about that
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 19:49:27 GMT
I'm with Hanako Ikezawa . It was exciting and I had fun... more importantly, it's a story that can get more and more exciting as we go along and learn more. Anything about Shepard now is anti-climatic. Your distain for Andromeda doesn't make the prospect of Shepard building a house any more exciting. The idea is, quite frankly, shit. Not only does it dictate a canon ending, now we have a canon LI... not to mention that it forces Shepard to be male. As KaiserShep indicated, there is very, very little room for Bioware to write Shepard into a sequel that keeps the various characters roleplayed by the multitude of different fans intact. Its not a canon LI I gave an ecample for one of the LIs. I really don't mind that you think Andromeda was fun since those who liked it remained on the forum and those who didn't left for the most part. Andromeda failed and thats a fact. Just like Anthem. It's a fact that declaring a single canon doesn't work because even among the bring Shepard back crowd, there are a million different, repeat different ideas about "who' that Shepard is and what his/her past relationship with his/her squad was. If only one Shepard-based sequel is to be written, only one type of Shepard can come back and that Shepard must have as singular type of relationship with all returning characters Otherwise, you simply don't have a starting point for another series and you've already blown apart the 'intact-ness" of the main character that KaiserShep mentions.
Most people played a male Shepard, but it's not OK and all Shepards going forward be male so that the male-sided relationship with all the character from the OT survive. Going forward with a multi-charactered sequel (such that each character as multiple different "pasts" with Shepard) is simply not practical. That's why Bioware clearly decided to end the Trilogy with ME3 and why it should absolutely end with ME3. Shepard's story is DONE. Bioware has said it themselves multiple times.
In most of the endings, Shepard is dead. In many of the endings, any of the other characters could also be dead. In many of the endings, many different characters of either gender could be LIs. In manyof the endings, Shepard did NOT indicate he/she would help Tali build a house even. There is no "canon" for any of it.... nor should there be because it does NOT give everyone what they want. Rather, a canon created by Bioware would likely goes against something in everyone's playthroughs.
|
|
Hrulj
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
Posts: 263 Likes: 271
inherit
3276
0
Mar 19, 2023 16:55:53 GMT
271
Hrulj
263
February 2017
hrulj
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion
|
Post by Hrulj on May 28, 2019 20:39:49 GMT
Its not a canon LI I gave an ecample for one of the LIs. I really don't mind that you think Andromeda was fun since those who liked it remained on the forum and those who didn't left for the most part. Andromeda failed and thats a fact. Just like Anthem. It's a fact that declaring a single canon doesn't work because even among the bring Shepard back crowd, there are a million different, repeat different ideas about "who' that Shepard is and what his/her past relationship with his/her squad was. If only one Shepard-based sequel is to be written, only one type of Shepard can come back and that Shepard must have as singular type of relationship with all returning characters Otherwise, you simply don't have a starting point for another series and you've already blown apart the 'intact-ness" of the main character that KaiserShep mentions.
Most people played a male Shepard, but it's not OK and all Shepards going forward be male so that the male-sided relationship with all the character from the OT survive. Going forward with a multi-charactered sequel (such that each character as multiple different "pasts" with Shepard) is simply not practical. That's why Bioware clearly decided to end the Trilogy with ME3 and why it should absolutely end with ME3. Shepard's story is DONE. Bioware has said it themselves multiple times.
In most of the endings, Shepard is dead. In many of the endings, any of the other characters could also be dead. In many of the endings, many different characters of either gender could be LIs. In manyof the endings, Shepard did NOT indicate he/she would help Tali build a house even. There is no "canon" for any of it.... nor should there be because it does NOT give everyone what they want. Rather, a canon created by Bioware would likely goes against something in everyone's playthroughs.
Hardly. There is only one viable canon ending whatsoever. Synthesis - the mind rape of everyone into a hive consciousness of organics and synthetics leads to stagnation and lack of conflict. Hard to steal when trillions know you did it. Hard to be ambitious or cause trouble. Ergo synthesis locks down everything if it even works. Control again leads to stagnation as benevolent or malevolent overlord controls the galaxy with an iron fist and prevents any kind of conflict. Saren 2.0 causing trouble? Send 1500 reaper dreadnoughts after him and be done with it. Batarians talk shit over it? Crush em. Destroy is the only ending that leaves personal choice and agenda viable. How you get to it, as paragon, renegade, if you dated Garrus, Liara, Tali or Kaidan, if you let Quarians die or not, your previous contacts etc can all be transitioned and imported from previous games. Gender of Shepard has nothing to do with it. Or the looks of it. Bioware ended the trilogy cause they wrote themselves into a corner. They can either canonize the ending or come up with bullshit reasons to never ever touch the milky way galaxy. Canon ending is not canon for everything. Many players killed Ashley in game one yet there was dialogue and stories for Ashley in both 2 and 3. Many people have replayed the trilogy many times over trying out every ending and alternative. You're either being obtuse on purpose or we're not getting each other
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 21:12:43 GMT
It's a fact that declaring a single canon doesn't work because even among the bring Shepard back crowd, there are a million different, repeat different ideas about "who' that Shepard is and what his/her past relationship with his/her squad was. If only one Shepard-based sequel is to be written, only one type of Shepard can come back and that Shepard must have as singular type of relationship with all returning characters Otherwise, you simply don't have a starting point for another series and you've already blown apart the 'intact-ness" of the main character that KaiserShep mentions.
Most people played a male Shepard, but it's not OK and all Shepards going forward be male so that the male-sided relationship with all the character from the OT survive. Going forward with a multi-charactered sequel (such that each character as multiple different "pasts" with Shepard) is simply not practical. That's why Bioware clearly decided to end the Trilogy with ME3 and why it should absolutely end with ME3. Shepard's story is DONE. Bioware has said it themselves multiple times.
In most of the endings, Shepard is dead. In many of the endings, any of the other characters could also be dead. In many of the endings, many different characters of either gender could be LIs. In manyof the endings, Shepard did NOT indicate he/she would help Tali build a house even. There is no "canon" for any of it.... nor should there be because it does NOT give everyone what they want. Rather, a canon created by Bioware would likely goes against something in everyone's playthroughs.
Hardly. There is only one viable canon ending whatsoever. Synthesis - the mind rape of everyone into a hive consciousness of organics and synthetics leads to stagnation and lack of conflict. Hard to steal when trillions know you did it. Hard to be ambitious or cause trouble. Ergo synthesis locks down everything if it even works. Control again leads to stagnation as benevolent or malevolent overlord controls the galaxy with an iron fist and prevents any kind of conflict. Saren 2.0 causing trouble? Send 1500 reaper dreadnoughts after him and be done with it. Batarians talk shit over it? Crush em. Destroy is the only ending that leaves personal choice and agenda viable. How you get to it, as paragon, renegade, if you dated Garrus, Liara, Tali or Kaidan, if you let Quarians die or not, your previous contacts etc can all be transitioned and imported from previous games. Gender of Shepard has nothing to do with it. Or the looks of it. Bioware ended the trilogy cause they wrote themselves into a corner. They can either canonize the ending or come up with bullshit reasons to never ever touch the milky way galaxy. Canon ending is not canon for everything. Many players killed Ashley in game one yet there was dialogue and stories for Ashley in both 2 and 3. Many people have replayed the trilogy many times over trying out every ending and alternative. You're either being obtuse on purpose or we're not getting each other No, ending the Trilogy with ME3 is what works. It's what was done. On a level argument with yours... There is no viable continuation because Destroy does not leave personal choice intact. It erases the personal choices made by a large portion of the fanbase... even ones who chose Destroy because they got there is different ways... having made different choices. If players killed Ashley in ME1, Ashley did not appear in ME2 or ME3. There were only posthumous stories about her. If the player lost Tali in ME2, she did not appear in ME3... but, if part of an MET sequel involves building a house for Tali... how do you claim that her death in ME2 is not invalidated? Shepard never stood on Rannoch with her and she certainly couldn't suddenly be alive. Even the circumstances of her death could not be mentioned - she might die in the vents, or be carried off by seeker swarms... or even blasted by a Reaper laser in ME3. If you did not recruit Garris in ME1, the dialogue reflects that in ME2. If you lost him in ME2, though, he does not suddenly appear in ME3. How would you explain then him suddenly being your "best bro" in an MET sequel without invalidating his death in your game in ME2? Stories about someone are one thing... but in order for a sequel to carry on with even a reduced set of the squad from past games, you would have to invalidate the deaths of those squad mates for a certain percentage of the player base. Any squad mate could have died... even Liara in ME3 (if the EC is not used and EMS is low enough.
As for synthesis and control not being viable... you're writing them forward and then using your "imagined" scenarios about them to say they aren't viable. Bioware could have in their heads intriguing stories in mind about any of them. Also, if it's acceptable to invalidate something like a squad members death with a canon, then anything about any of the endings can be changed to make them viable. As hard as the 'destroy" crowd want to box Bioware into a single choice, they can't. Bioware, in the end, can write whatever they WANT to write... and that's what they should do.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 21:15:15 GMT
Destroy does not leave personal choice intact Only when it's a game over screen. Like every Synthesis and Control choice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 21:31:39 GMT
Destroy does not leave personal choice intact Only when it's a game over screen. Like every Synthesis and Control choice. BS - choosing Synthesis or Control does not yield a game over screen... and my POV was explained in the post you clipped this from. Choices made by the player would not be preserved in a sequel even using the Destroy ending as canon. Shepard can die during the Destroy ending without a game over screen. A sequel bringing Shepard back to life does not preserve that choice either. Any squad mate can die at various points in the Trilogy... a destroy ending bringing back those squad mates does not preserve those choices regardless of whether or not their Shepard lived through a Destroy ending. Furthermore, not using the EC is also a player choice. A "Shepard lives" ending is still possible while not using the EC. However, even if EMS is low enough that Liara dies on the end run, the choice does not result in a game over screen.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,272
themikefest
14,815
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on May 28, 2019 21:37:38 GMT
Also, if it's acceptable to invalidate something like a squad members death with a canon, then anything about any of the endings can be changed to make them viable. But Bioware has invalidated a choice regardless of how insignificant the choice is. If they can do that, they can invalidate any choice they want.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 21:47:22 GMT
But Bioware has invalidated a choice regardless of how insignificant the choice is Like buying Andromeda.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 21:50:39 GMT
Also, if it's acceptable to invalidate something like a squad members death with a canon, then anything about any of the endings can be changed to make them viable. But Bioware has invalidated a choice regardless of how insignificant the choice is. If they can do that, they can invalidate any choice they want. ... and I've asked before... If they choose to go with a Synthesis ending as written and make that canon... would you be happy about it? If they chose to make a canon Shepard completely unlike "your Shepard" would you be happy about it?
They can absolutely do whatever they want... and they should. My personal preference though is to leave the OT as it is. End it where they previously chose to end it. Continue with whatever their plans were for an Andromeda sequel. IF they did that (and they don't have to), I'd be my happiest. Would I backlash" - no. Would it necessarily interest me to buy it and play it... depends totally on the game itself AFTER its released. If not, I'll buy simply buy something else and you'll never see me on the site discussing ME5.
Bioware has nothing to "fear" from me. Do they have anything to "fear" of anyone of you IF they decide to go with an Andromeda sequel with Ryder? If so, then you're denying Bioware's right to choose the course of their own franchise and write whatever inspires them.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 21:57:28 GMT
But Bioware has invalidated a choice regardless of how insignificant the choice is. If they can do that, they can invalidate any choice they want. ... and I've asked before... If they choose to go with a Synthesis ending as written and make that canon... would you be happy about it? If they chose to make a canon Shepard completely unlike "your Shepard" would you be happy about it?
They can absolutely do whatever they want... and they should. My personal preference though is to leave the OT as it is. End it where they previously chose to end it. Continue with whatever their plans were for an Andromeda sequel. IF they did that (and they don't have to), I'd be my happiest. Would I backlash" - no. Bioware has nothing to "fear" from my. Do they have anything to "fear" of anyone of you IF they decide to go with an Andromeda sequel with Ryder? If so, then you're denying Bioware's right to choose the course of their own franchise and write whatever inspires them.
Loaded questions and opinion pieces.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 22:04:45 GMT
... and I've asked before... If they choose to go with a Synthesis ending as written and make that canon... would you be happy about it? If they chose to make a canon Shepard completely unlike "your Shepard" would you be happy about it?
They can absolutely do whatever they want... and they should. My personal preference though is to leave the OT as it is. End it where they previously chose to end it. Continue with whatever their plans were for an Andromeda sequel. IF they did that (and they don't have to), I'd be my happiest. Would I backlash" - no. Bioware has nothing to "fear" from my. Do they have anything to "fear" of anyone of you IF they decide to go with an Andromeda sequel with Ryder? If so, then you're denying Bioware's right to choose the course of their own franchise and write whatever inspires them.
Loaded questions and opinion pieces. Absolutely. I'm asking for an opinion and giving my opinion. What's wrong with that? Your whole argument on the other thread is giving your opinion and quoting the opinions of others about ME3... opinions that not everyone agrees with... so, if it's OK for you, it should be OK for me too. Just because there's numerous opinion videos about stuff on Youtube doesn't make them any less opinions. A fact, on the other hand, is that, in most of the currently available endings in ME3, Shepard dies. It's also a demonstrable fact that not everyone chose the destroy ending. It's also a demonstrable inaccuracy to say that everyone dislikes Ryder... or that continuing on with Shepard is "giving everyone what they want." (which is something you did say). It is a matter of opinion to say that there would be a huge backlash if an Andromeda sequel were released and also a matter of opinion to say it wouldn't be that bad. Since both statements are predictions and speculation, they cannot be fact.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 22:08:41 GMT
Loaded questions and opinion pieces. Absolutely. I'm asking for an opinion and giving my opinion. What's wrong with that? For starters, there is no Synthesis Shepard, he is dead. So you question is wrong, therefore the rest of your argument is an unsubstantiated opinion piece of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 22:24:53 GMT
Absolutely. I'm asking for an opinion and giving my opinion. What's wrong with that? For starters, there is no Synthesis Shepard, he is dead. So you question is wrong, therefore the rest of your argument is an unsubstantiated opinion piece of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality. A direct sequel to ME3 can have a dead Shepard and continue with a different protagonist, can't it? You have yet to explain your point on the other thread. I'll ask again, how can something not yet written prohibit the player. You have no idea what additional endings Bioware might add (if they choose to go that route) and what they would involve. They might remove prohibitions that currently exist in the game rather than create new ones. You cannot say that they would prohibit the player (which you said). How does an unspecified and unwritten DLC invalidate what's written in a book. Again, I never specified what items from the game might be "addressed" by such a DLC. That's for Bioware to decide. They might choose to invalidate something in a book, but they certainly wouldn't have to in order to generate a DLC for Andromeda at this point. Care to support your argument... right now it's unsubstanttiated opinion of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,272
themikefest
14,815
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on May 28, 2019 22:26:49 GMT
... and I've asked before... If they choose to go with a Synthesis ending as written and make that canon... would you be happy about it? If they chose to make a canon Shepard completely unlike "your Shepard" would you be happy about it? You keep bringing that up. Why? Do you want them to choose the green? As far as making a Shepard different from mine? They already did that in ME3 with a few of the things my Shepard wouldn't have done. I chalk it up to Shepard's stunt double doing/saying whatever. I'm sure Bioware will do what they want regardless of what people want them to do. It's possible Bioware might take part of an idea someone has mentioned especially if it's something that works with what Bioware wants to do. What's with the fear word? I believe that's the second time you've posted that.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
30,249
Hanako Ikezawa
22,357
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on May 28, 2019 22:27:01 GMT
Absolutely. I'm asking for an opinion and giving my opinion. What's wrong with that? For starters, there is no Synthesis Shepard, he is dead. So you question is wrong, therefore the rest of your argument is an unsubstantiated opinion piece of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality. Its almost like they had that as two separate questions or something.
|
|
inherit
Glorious Star Lord
822
0
Jan 24, 2024 17:47:40 GMT
16,819
KaiserShep
Party like it's 2023!
9,233
August 2016
kaisershep
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by KaiserShep on May 28, 2019 22:32:23 GMT
I think it's kind of too little too late for something like that. ME3's ending was the opportunity to give (surviving) Shepard that sendoff, and they missed it. I don't think it would really blow anyone's hair back to bring Shepard back just to do a lot of mundane stuff. And besides, I think that having Shepard return to being an errand-running infantryman after literally turning into Galactic Savior Supreme would be really unsatisfying. Like, really? We're just going to have the most decorated soldier in all of history survive an orbital blast from a relay go traipsing about the clusters fighting outlaws and alien scum for the Alliance or whoever? Nuts to that. I'd say that's grounds for early retirement from that bitch to get on with life and let someone not blown up multiple times take the reins.
Your point about Ryder doesn't change the point I'm making. This ain't a person whose innate abilities constrain the writers. They can do whatever they want with them. If a protagonist is handed the idiot ball to get the plot going, they're going to pass the idiot ball to anyone. Doesn't matter if it's Ryder, Shepard, the Warden, Inquisitor, whatever. If the writers unwittingly (or wittingly?) make a character stupid so that the antagonist gets the upper hand, you won't solve that problem by just swapping them out for [insert favorite character] instead. If they made Ryder fail, they'd make Shepard fail. Shepard's only true benefit is market appeal, and that's it. Everything else relies entirely on whether or not the writing team is up to snuff.
Oh jesus what the hell is it with people being stuck up on one thing. This isn't Shepard - the Minecraft one where the game is about building a dumb house on Rannoch, it was an example of how continuing from shepard can give the emotional ties and basis where building a home for Tali does indeed feel like an achievement since you spent years with her as crewmate or potentially lover. The game itself would be about exploring the galaxy, rebuilding the old and going into inactive relays. Far from an errand runner, he's a leader of an expedition, put at the head of it since it is a "cushy" position and he is a prestigious enough person that he brings respect wherever he goes. And its their choice to do so. Ryder doesn't matter whatsoever. There is not a single high value memorable character in Andromeda. There was no impact to the game itself. New Character won't fix it either. If there is a new character it'll probably be a down syndrome dwarf quadreplegic double amputee transwoman boxer demisexual 7th wave feminist black supremacist. Its where Bioware and it's writing is. And where EA is. Dont' care to see it really. By nature, the protagonist of any of these games is going to essentially be working for quest-givers. We can choose whether or not to accept the quests, but it's a thin illusion of agency to gloss over the fact that the quest-givers are the only source of anything to do. If we play Shepard, some other NPC is going to give us directions where to go, otherwise there's no game plot to follow. I don't want Shepard to be in that sort of role. If Shepard is in a position of actual power after the war, that would be a position where they simply tell everyone else what to do and sit back somewhere unseen while other rank and file get it done. That's pretty much what Shepard was. Yeah yeah Shepard's a celebrity to keep the power fantasy momentum going, but it's just one puny human with some guns and a couple weirdos shooting up bunkers in the armpits of the galaxy. Hackett's position is where Shepard should be at this point, not some mook in a little home base spaceship still doing the fireteam thing. Your second paragraph doesn't touch on what I was talking about. You keep saying how Ryder doesn't matter, but don't really seem to understand why that is. Forget that it's Ryder specifically, since it seems like you believe Ryder in and of itself is the source of the problem. In the right hands, any protagonist can be interesting, even if on paper they'd seem kind of dull. If the writers can give it a voice (or set of voices) that entertains enough people and engages them, then the character succeeds. Shepard isn't necessary. The game shouldn't rely on nostalgia to supplement character appeal.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 22:41:29 GMT
For starters, there is no Synthesis Shepard, he is dead. So you question is wrong, therefore the rest of your argument is an unsubstantiated opinion piece of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality. A direct sequel to ME3 can have a dead Shepard and continue with a different protagonist, can't it? You have yet to explain your point on the other thread. I'll ask again, how can something not yet written prohibit the player. You have no idea what additional endings Bioware might add (if they choose to go that route) and what they would involve. They might remove prohibitions that currently exist in the game rather than create new ones. You cannot say that they would prohibit the player (which you said). How does an unspecified and unwritten DLC invalidate what's written in a book. Again, I never specified what items from the game might be "addressed" by such a DLC. That's for Bioware to decide. They might choose to invalidate something in a book, but they certainly wouldn't have to in order to generate a DLC for Andromeda at this point. Care to support your argument... right now it's unsubstanttiated opinion of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality. Strawmans and opinions, self contradictions and subversions.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 22:44:19 GMT
For starters, there is no Synthesis Shepard, he is dead. So you question is wrong, therefore the rest of your argument is an unsubstantiated opinion piece of a hypothetical scenario that has no grounds on reality. Its almost like they had that as two separate questions or something. Logical fallacies and contradictions are perpetuated in his arguments. Followed by opinions that have no bearing in facts. And how about you declaring me a troll that's not worth your time? Am I worth it now?
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
30,249
Hanako Ikezawa
22,357
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on May 28, 2019 22:50:15 GMT
Its almost like they had that as two separate questions or something. Logical fallacies and contradictions are perpetuated in his arguments. Followed by opinions that have no bearing in facts. And how about you declaring me a troll that's not worth your time? Am I worth it now? Only until your hypocrisy and nonsense bore me again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 22:51:21 GMT
... and I've asked before... If they choose to go with a Synthesis ending as written and make that canon... would you be happy about it? If they chose to make a canon Shepard completely unlike "your Shepard" would you be happy about it? You keep bringing that up. Why? Do you want them to choose the green? As far as making a Shepard different from mine? They already did that in ME3 with a few of the things my Shepard wouldn't have done. I chalk it up to Shepard's stunt double doing/saying whatever. I'm sure Bioware will do what they want regardless of what people want them to do. It's possible Bioware might take part of an idea someone has mentioned especially if it's something that works with what Bioware wants to do. What's with the fear word? I believe that's the second time you've posted that. I clearly said I want them to leave ME3 as the ending of the Trilogy, so why are you asking if I want them to choose the green. I prefer to have all endings to ME3 remain as ending choices... key word "ending." So, they've already changed your Shepard, and you're unhappy about that (at least you've expressed enough dissatisfaction with it - autodialogue and such - that I can probably safely assume you're unhappy about that). Is there a reason I should believe you'd do a 180 and be happy about it going into a sequel to ME3?
The fear is something that SirSourpuss posted awhile ago... suggesting that Bioware shouldn't go for an Andromeda sequel because he/she feared a backlash if they did. So, it's a question - will you backlash? I don't think Bioware should choose based on "fear" of a backlash from any group regardless of their preference. If they choose based on fear, then they are not choosing based on what they feel most inspired about... and that doesn't generally lead to things like inspired writing.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2019 22:51:56 GMT
Only until your hypocrisy and nonsense bore me again. I love you too.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,272
themikefest
14,815
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on May 28, 2019 23:07:52 GMT
I clearly said I want them to leave ME3 as the ending of the Trilogy, so why are you asking if I want them to choose the green. Because you seem to be fixated on the green, and as the poster mentioned above, Shepard doesn't survive the green. So why are you asking if someone would be ok if they changed their Shepard when he/she is dead? It depends on what changes they make.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 23:10:14 GMT
Its almost like they had that as two separate questions or something. Logical fallacies and contradictions are perpetuated in his arguments. Followed by opinions that have no bearing in facts. And how about you declaring me a troll that's not worth your time? Am I worth it now? ... and on your poart... continued avoidance of actually supporting your points by trying to divert the discussion with a personal attack. Predictable if nothing else. The logical fallacy is yours. I did not specify or request anything specific enough for you to be able to say that additional endings would prohibit the player (it could just as easily remove prohitions from the player) or an Andromeda DLC would invalidate the Andromeda books (which could just as easily validate the Andromeda books). It would all depend on exactly what Bioware might choose to write in them.
|
|