Mass Effect 5 'The Return of Shepard'

I'm down for retconning in a time loop so that ME2 & 3 never happened. 

I think they need to let the trilogy go and stand on it's own. At some point tho, they need to address a final and absolute ending as to what happened in the Milky Way. And if fans are upset with whatever they provide, oh well. They way Bioware framed this in every player can craft his/her own ending was only going end in a way in which nobody will be completely happy.

For the series to progress they need to mention what actually happened in the MW for Andromeda 2 and let the trilogy stay in the MW. 600 years have past...Shepard is clearly dead by now and any cloning stasis tactics would somewhat cheap and having him in the Andromeda universe (while cool) would just be overshadowing these Ryder characters you are trying to build upon.

I like Shepard, but his/her story has been told and a final absolution needs to be stated for the next game regardless of how fans may call for the dev's head because they didn't agree with the ending they wanted. I wouldn't mind making a trip back to the MW just to see what happened, and whether the narrative takes on a tone of the MW being almost completely obliterated due to the Reapers or seeing that the MW is still recovering and maybe a story revolving around the potent dark matter energy can be told.

I wouldn't want the Reaper as a threat tho, maybe some other multi-dimensional entity or threat just as terrorizing as the Reaper threat.....those universal wide storylines do it for me, where the universe is on the brink of collapse rather than dealing with a generic faction like the kett. The only time i felt the need of a sense of urgency in Andromeda was when there was talk about what was happening back in the MW and how everything and everybody was being decimated....

Yeah I get it

Just hoping and hoping I guess. I need to watch Frozen again, and let it go.

Hey, with going back in time you keep ME2 and 3. Best of both worlds. 

Details and minutiae.
The point that Shepard's story reached the end; the point where it no longer makes sense to see an ongoing story from his POV, was completely clear even before 3 ended. I'll admit, I wasn't really a fan of this because BioWare just went the cliche "Hero sacrifice" route and I really just, for once, wanted my hero to end up with his loved ones and they lived happily ever after or maybe he changed name and retired or anything just not the "he died to save everyone" crap that's been done to death. Letting go of Shepard was going to be hard no matter how they decided to tell you his story ended in 3. Citadel DLC was a good sendoff with what they had left and I was content with that.

But, you have to realize, all of ya, that Shepard was always meant to be put to rest at the end of the trilogy he was featured in. If he ever returns it'll be as a service to you and not some purposeful story unless it's one of those deconstructions or faux pas art pieces.

Andromeda's decision to start fresh somehow was good. Going to another galaxy in 600 years and the rationale for doing so was, however, not and the execution of anything that happened after its contrived premise felt almost just as contrived, so it's kind of a fluke. Like the prequels of Star Wars it's not the concept that sucked and I actually think Episode 1, 2 and 3 are all better than 7 and any of the newer Star Wars bullshit, but it's the execution of it that fails to impress.

Even with the contrived reasoning of going to Andromeda this game could've made you drop your Shepard and Garrus body pillows and start salivating all over Ryder and Vetra if only they had sold you on the concept, like if the stakes had fealt impactful, if the family story had been rubbed in the wound harder, with more depth to their history and believable relationships and if there really was a sense of loss to whatever would happen if we didn't manage to pathfind well. Anything really. But Andromeda was just perfunctory.

That Shepard sequel you're asking for would be just as perfunctory. EA/Ware would be selling you the brand and you'd buy it because you love the brand but then next time you'd realize you don't care as much about Shepard anymore because the story, its execution and the game-journey you went through in the trilogy was what made it for you. You can't just insert Shepard in an empty room for 60 hours and make it just as exciting as Mass Effect 2 can you? There's not much they can do if Shepard survived ME3's ending that wouldn't end up with us feeling less excited about him.

One of the few things I agree with Bioware on is that Shepard's story is finished. If they ever go back to the Milky Way (preferably post ME3), it would be better to have a new ship and crew, and not Normandy lite like the Tempest and its crew. Maybe the PC could find a VI or something, but I'd leave it at that.

I love Shepard but I've come to love my Ryder. I don't know that I would want to go back at this point. I would  much rather really just watch how this one evolves. The more I think about it, aside from the story being a bit meh and the villain being a joke there are many things that are better than ME1. Ryder could at times use a whack with a maturity stick. Ryder did seem to improve as the story progressed at least for me. I think maybe initially ryder wasn't great because they really wanted to emphasize how new and green they were, something I personally think was a very poor choice. They didn't have to make ryder new and green for people to feel like they started with a fresh new character who worked toward the shepard level of hero/legend. They could have still emphasized skill and training a bit more than what they did which they seem to also confuse with maturity or ability to handle situations in a relatively professional manner. 

Shepard was great. But Ryder can be too. I think in the next game ryder will be closer to what shepard was in ME1 but might still have those witty sarcastic moments. 

Because Bio didn't want to do multiple versions of the scene, which is also why they don't show quarian ships.



The same point it ever had. It was only there for the symbolism anyway.

Reaper shepherd best shepherd

It's an observation of the cheapness of the entire EC. When they could re-use a graphic with a minor color swap, they did. Since you're asking why Bio didn't spend money on doing alternate versions of the shot, them simply not wanting to spend more money is a good working hypothesis, particularly since there's no other hypothesis kicking around.

As for the symbolism, I thought that the "it's a new world" aspect was blatantly obvious. (I suppose you could even say the scene's Edenic, since the galaxy's original sin has been erased, though this is a lousy fit with Christian mythology.) The physical reality of the world is almost certainly a bit different from the image presented; there's no chance that a garden world a secondary relay jump away from Sol hasn't been colonized by the Alliance.

It makes sense considering they have a DLC size limit. Qurians and Geth may or may not be present. The real question is why these lazy mofos didn't show us any salarian ships. Never say a salarian ship in the entire trilogy.