Would you like a Soft Reboot for Mass Effect Milk Way Galaxy

To be fair there would be ways they could improve the over all story line by having it more mapped and creating more consistency across trilogy. Protheans for example have very contradictory backgrounds that are never fully explained which is the correct canon.


Also everyone thinks that if only BioWare rebooted it and made the game how I think it should be done everyone would love it. Which is doubtful to say the least.

I think it is in part how shoe horned Andromeda's story was. I've not played the game but I have read the plot so granted there can be things I miss that can only be saw or fully understood through game play.  The over all story is fairly weak with many cases possible inspiration for events and plot lines being rather obviously inspired by other media in much more obvious ways. 

The Remnants and their creators for example I simply can't see as anything more then blatant rip offs of Forerunners from the Halo series.  Super advanced technology left behind by a mysterious race that caused a massive cataclysm then disappeared. Super advanced tech that can only be accessed by humans studying glyphs (there is no recorded spoken Forerunner language just glyph) that the Kett have failed time and time against to access. Almost like they were magically chosen to inherent the technology even though the initiatives are technologically inferior to the Kett.  And the Kett themselves are simply a more realistic version of the Reapers. One that you could actually allow a victory over without a deus ex machnia.

BioWare was so focused on avoiding the elephant in the room of ME 3's ending they put a wig and make up on a pig, married it and asked for health insurance just to avoid it so players wouldn't complain. The end result is a mess of the story that creates glaring inconsistencies within it self and royally fucks up ME 3 to high hell.

This is difficult.

On one hand, you couldn't get me to go back to Andromeda and play as Ryder again, even if you paid me. Then again, the Milky Way post-ME3 just doesn't interest me at all.

You say it's so easy, but that also means if, say, Control happened, it takes place many years after ME3. It has to, or else the Reapers are still around rebuilding. That means no Normandy SR2 (maybe SR3 or above) and no previous crew. Even if it were, which crew? Also, why would Shepard take the Reapers out anyway? Just 'cuz? And Synthesis has everyone glowing green. Dismissing that makes that ending moot. It's only easy if you want to ignore ME3 practically in its entirety.

1. many years? let's say a decade, maybe 15 years. If we were capable to build the defenitive weapon of mass destruction (the crucible) in few months (in war time!), we surely can rebuild the citadel and the portal system in a decade (with the reapers help!). And the reapers don't need to help us rebuilding every shack and palace, just the important things.
Germany and Japan were razed to the ground after ww2. 15 years later? Back to business. The galaxy can do better.
10-20 years from Me3, almost every crew member can be alive and well.


2. Why would Shepard take the Reapers out? And what should he do instead? Establish its benevolent dictatorship? Make them a member of the council, debating about customs duties? Micromanage the galaxy with his fleet? Well, maybe... but maybe not. Be a distant, neutral silent guardian of peace like a sort space grey warden is 
sufficiently consistent.

Or go further. The sheparlyst and the reapers share their technology and immense knowledge with other species. Why should they keep it for themselves? No way, too selfish. With the reapes knowledge, the tech advancment are outstanding. In medicine, space travel, genetic, engineering. And warfare tech too. The gap between the reapers fleet and any other fleet gets thinner and thinner. Mankind in 2148 was nothing. 30 years later, was almost powerful as turian and asari. It demonstrate that the tech gap can be quickly filled. So, 30 years from ME3 ending, the reapers are just another powerful player in the galaxy, maybe still the most powerful, but and not the super-mega-uber-invincibl thing they used to be. They are not the ultimate deus ex machina. So, there is no need to make them central in the next story.


3. Glowing green. Very unaesthetic indeed. Two possible solution, imo.
a) green glowing was not permanent. Like a bad sunburn
green glowing was just symbolic
c) i'm sure that a team of well paid professional writers can figured it out...

1. perfect, something like DAI.
A couple of old companions as followers/advisors, a couple as important quest character, some cameos etc. Their purpose is to emotionally link the new game to the old trilogy, and there are lots of possible way to do it.

2. what do you mean by "they have nothing to do"? A new "minor" threat/plot that doesn't require the reapers decisive intervention is unconcievable? An advanced galaxy where everybody reached the reapers fire- power and warfare tech in unconceivable? The reapers are vulnerable, in a control ending.
The crucible project are everywhere. Liara's beacon are everywhere. Reapers tech is easy to find and study.
A powerful and rich terrorist organisation (or a semi-indipendet system like ilium) can secretly build another crucible, in 20-30 years. And if they find/crrate another power source like the citadel (or connect it to the citadel with a blitz loke the saren/soverign one) the reapers are done.
Also, the leviathans can destroy a sovereing class reapers in few seconds. So, anti-reapers tech exist, and the reapers are not hunting down every possible threat. So in a few decade anti-reapers tech can be perfected (and used) by any anti-reapers faction.
I'm nit saying that the reapers should be treated as irrelvant, but the reapers and the sheparlyst as the all-mighty, invincible, unchallenged ruler and guardians of the galaxy for thousand of years is just a possible outcome. And not the most likely, imo.

So, if we make the reapers somehow vulnerable, a new team of heroes will be needed to save the day.

3. total cop out? well yes, glowing things are awful. But why tshould it be permanent? The space magic wave is just space magic, it can be dealt as we want. We have no previous rules to respect.
Or just make the glowing a graphical option. Option -> graphic -> film grain? Y/N; glowing effects? Y/N.
Shouldn't be such a problem.
Or simply forget about glowings thing, I mean, does is REALLY matter? Is the green glow what really characterise and make synthesis an interesting scenario? Will synthesis people be offended without the green glow?
They've made zombie leliana an advisor, they can forget about glowing green things..

I want to see a progression of ME:A's story now. IMO, the ME Trilogy story was adequately completed in ME3. Ryder's personality can change as he/she grows up a little and he/she can easily become every bit the intriguing protagonist Shepard was in MET. The story in ME:A can take off in any number of directions with no further retcons needed. There's a whole galaxy there with unlimited wonders and species yet to be discovered.

ME:A2 is not limited by ME:A1 in any way. It has every bit as much potential (and MORE) to be a great game as any version of MET4 people have been dreaming up. Why would I want to see MET's story diminished by a sequel fighting a more minor war like a second Krogan Rebellion? I wouldn't. Furthermore, in any ending of ME3, the Reaper problem was resolved. That was the purpose of the Trilogy and the bottom line of all the endings. Whatever "continuation" one devises to bring the Reapers back as the enemy undoes those endings and nullifies the purpose of everything in all 3 games. It doesn't matter which specific ending the player chose... carrying on a Reaper war story would, without exception, undo them all.  Bringing a reaper enemy back would, without exception, mean that Shepard failed in his mission to stop them.

Nah - The future lies in Andromeda. If they don't do another Andromeda game... I sincerely hope they have the good sense to at least not meddle with the Trilogy. It's too good to be diminished by a "forced" sequel to that story.

as for me, I rather have the Bioware Team take their time and listen to their fans and not listen to them as well. For example, Having Ryder to become more reasonable mature within context of a MEA:2. A healthy medium between Light Heart and Darker tone would work well with many fans.

If they do a Milk Way Mass Effect Post ME3 game, I have no problem if they tastefully disregard the ME3 ending with tie that said change into the new game. For example, Watching Henry Lawson with a massive Collector army behind him kill T.I.M., Anderson and Shepard and then have an appearance of Sovereign and Harbringer laughing with Henry Lawson. Having a trifecta of Sovereign, Harbringer and Henry Lawson ruling the galaxy and doing the harvest. Letting Henry Lawson to become a God-Emperor of the Milk Way.

My idea of a Post ME3 Milk Way Mass effect game if done poorly will suck massively. Some of my ideas are not the best. No matter how well thought out it is in my head, it doesn't mean others will like it. Even if it is done well.

In short, I don't care for the PC as much as I care for a good mass effect game. I don't care if it is Ryder, Shepard, Cerberus Phantom, Turian Blue Sun Merc, Volus Vanguard or other hero. Good Mass Effect game is worthy every penny.

1.  ME:A's perception of quality would not have any different bearing on the quality of any ME game regardless of whether it goes back to the Milky Way or stays in Andromeda.  The quality of that future game depends solely on the people that Bioware have on their staff when the game is being developed.  People that somehow think that a game going back to the Milky Way would somehow be magically better than ME:A are simply deluding themselves.  If handled the same way ME:A was handled, it will have the same quality as ME:A itself.  If handled well, an ME:A story will be every bit as good as one written for the Milky Way.

2.  The ME:A story has much more potential to develop more varied and interesting plot lines in a wider variety of exotic locales with a wider variety of new species and it already takes us 600 years farther into the future.  MET, on the hand limits us to a galaxy that has numerous planets already defined that are shown in every quadrant of the galaxy.  Their geography, lore, and histrories were already written into the Codices.  One can say the galaxy was 99% unexplored... but explaining why the Asari did not yet explore Planet X when neighboring Planet Y is Thessia creates as big an issue as the oft-used argument about going to Andromeda when one hasn't totally explored the Milky Way.

3.  The "save the galaxy" cliche, however, was what was the basis of the MET.  We did the BIG war, so anything smaller would be seen as a step back.  The Witcher started with the smaller battle and continues to build.  ME:A also has started us with a smaller battle, so it too can continue to build momentum rather than having to be a step down from some Greater War.  People would expect that if Shepard was going to be called back into service, it would be to fight something even worse than the Reapers. 

4.  If one goes the prequel route, then we're limited to the quality of tech that appeared in ME1.  No improved weapons, mako, or ships could be introduced or it would beg the oft used "Why didn't Shepard know about it" question.  The ship would have to be inferior to the Normandy SR1... or else it would mean the SR1 wasn't the state-of-the-art prototype it was stated to be in ME1.  Actually, Shep wouldn't even be able to be in command of any ship, since the SR1 was his first ship.

5.  A "great lead writer" would be able to write a great ME:A story as well.  MET has no advantage on that front.  It actually has a disadvantage because it would have to be made to "fit" into the existing lore and Milky Way "universe."  Andromeda has far fewer constraints in that regard, since there is more that we don't know about Angara history and tech and lore and there's even less that we know of the Jaardan.  Any amount of new Andromedan tech can be introduced.  Move over to a new cluster, and every planet can hold something new. The subject matter in Andromeda is much less constrained, so a great writer would be freer to use their own creativity to write a great story.

Just to be clear, I hate Synthesis in ways I can probably never fully convey.  Still, it's not easy to sidestep.

I'm aware of Leliana, though I wasn't at the time when I first played DAI.  I'd never killed her in DAO, or even really knew it was an option.  Still, I think it was a mistake and that someone should have been present for an import where she was dead.  Hence, I don't want to see such mistakes repeated.

Yes, I know we can ignore just about anything.  I'm just saying, what's the point?  Move on and let Shepard & Co. rest in peace.

I think it's safe to say that I don't have interest in a continuation or a reboot, soft or otherwise.  I'm satisfied with the trilogy we got, that the story ended and the characters get to live out whatever lives they want (assuming they survived).  Nostalgia is great and all but rarely translates well into stories.

And it's a damn shame that they downgrade the series with a B-team and they were forced to use Frostbite engine that made the game a disaster, and it's a good thing that they didn't bribe game journalists to have it GOTY. And I do agree that they could revamp and reboot the trilogy for the sake of editing inconsistent plot holes, better writing, and better level design of the game.