inherit
1227
0
3,700
Phantom
2,668
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 17, 2019 2:23:39 GMT
This is just me, if Shepard does return, I do see a playable intro that you play as Shepard that explains any of the Retcons of the ME3's endings and sets a post Reaper War for the Milk Way Mass Effect with a New Player Character.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
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 Aug 17, 2019 13:48:59 GMT
Basically I am saying they should bring them back because it will get more excitment and people would buy more copies. At worst, Bioware survives long enough to make one more game, following that formula.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,940 Likes: 3,178
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,178
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,940
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Aug 17, 2019 17:46:27 GMT
Prequel, set in the late 2170s. Maybe feature the Skyllian Blitz but as a minor part of the story, should be an original story like RDR2.
I'm sick and tied of prequels. They mostly offer very little or next to nothing new and are generally boring as hell, you can't have much suspense and surprise if you know how the story ends. I mean look at the endings of Star Wars III and Star Trek: Enterprise you knew how those series were going to end from the start and neither one did much to help their respective series.
|
|
Polka Dot
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 679 Likes: 1,207
inherit
10957
0
Feb 14, 2019 20:07:41 GMT
1,207
Polka Dot
679
Feb 14, 2019 18:50:29 GMT
February 2019
polkadot
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Polka Dot on Aug 17, 2019 17:50:03 GMT
No. ...and these posts illustrate some of the reasons why: I said yes and only because I want to have Jack find me in the rubble via the omni tattoo she put on me (really love that part when she chokes up, true love ) but come to think of it I think it would be great if they made the game to where all you saved LI found at the beginning of the game but Hey! that's just me It's sweet. I admit one of my big reasons for wanting another game is to get more time with the crew. I really wish we would have gotten more closure with our crew and LI's. Also was that part in the citadel dlc? Yeah, but like I said upthread, the problem is implementation. Incorporating choices from the previous games was already approaching unfeasible with ME3. The problem would be much worse in ME5. Unless the great unwashed masses out there really don't care about this stuff? Conceivable, but I'd need to see some sort of data on that. Part of the data here. I really don't fucking care what the conclusions were, I just want the OT's unrealized potential be somehow realized, mainly the character development parts and especially the obvious arcs that were dropped because, chop-chop, we got a 18 month deadline to make the biggest game in the trilogy, drop every character and focus on Liara and Garrus exclusively. And remember; best place to start the trilogy! By my count, there are: 20 potential squadmates, most of whom may be dead. 7 other crew members, some optional, some may be dead. (Joker, Chakwas, Michel, Kelly, Traynor, Cortez, Allers). 17 of the above may be current and/or ex LIs. ...and loads of other characters in the world, many of whom may also be dead or have been replaced by substitutes (original/replacement council, Mordin/Wiks, Maelon, Wreav, Eve, Hackett, Anderson, Primarch Victus, Matriarch Aethyta, Aria, Kahlee Sanders, Brynn Cole, Oriana Lawson - to name a few). That's a helluva lot of baggage to carry forward, and it doesn't even begin to address a lot of choices the player may have made. Nevermind that a lot of people used mods, and I'd wager that the vast majority of people who played through MET have their own headcanon about the future. People's attachment to Shepard (and the Milky Way) isn't just about Shepard (or TMW) - it's also about the other characters and relationships Shepard built with them along the way. Unless BioWare fully supports all of those characters - and in all of the possible configurations - they'd likely anger just as many fans as they would attract with a new entry featuring Shepard. The only way I could ever see them doing another game with Shepard would be a prequel - and then you'd be dealing with a very different Shepard. No Normandy, none of the squadmates to whom people are so attached, no Spectre status, perhaps yet unproven. Shepard did not become the CO of a ship until ME1, so we'd be dealing with a Shepard who was maybe a squad leader going on various missions. Is that what people want?
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,690
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,066
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 17, 2019 21:42:57 GMT
Even the current proposal to gate save importing-- Shepards who didn't end with high-EMS Destroy need not apply -- only alleviates this a little, by confirming Liara, Vega, Joker, and Traynor as alive, and EDI as dead.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
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 Aug 18, 2019 0:42:22 GMT
None of these excuses matter. Make a filter, proceed with the choices that would leave the galaxy in the most fun way to continue and go from there. You either do it, or you die. linkWell. I guess Andromeda 2 can't kill what's already dead.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,690
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,066
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 18, 2019 1:49:44 GMT
You're starting to sound like someone in deep denial.
Edit for clarity: when someone makes a case that your preferred strategy is unworkable, saying that "it just has to work" is not an adequate response. That's how the Japanese ended up bombing Pearl Harbor.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,700
Phantom
2,668
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 18, 2019 2:09:15 GMT
makes popcorn for this thread
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
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 Aug 18, 2019 7:27:07 GMT
You're starting to sound like someone in deep denial. And I think people here are intentionally overcomplicating things. It's a simple choice; make the game that has the most pull and that will sell you the most copies. Or don't.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 18, 2019 21:09:11 GMT
You're starting to sound like someone in deep denial. Edit for clarity: when someone makes a case that your preferred strategy is unworkable, saying that "it just has to work" is not an adequate response. That's how the Japanese ended up bombing Pearl Harbor. Actually the attack at pearl harbor was meant to cripple the pacific fleet and give japan time to get situated in the pacific before the US could respond. They underestimated the american factory and our ability to make ships and such. However in the short term (a year or two) we would have been crippled in the pacific and the japanese would have been given free reign more or less in the pacific. The only reason this really failed was because the air craft carriers weren't there which led to them missing their main targets. If the aircraft carriers had been there then there plan would have worked for a short time and made the U.S. forces job ALOT harder and take longer to defeat the japanese in the pacific. However by failing to hit the air craft carriers (you can argue it was either our luck or their failed intelligence that caused that) they left us a chance to hold them off and we took advantage of it and thus held them back to some degree and hurt their navy enough to keep them from using it offensively on a a large scale after the battle of midway. Thus while they would have lost eventually if their plan had worked and those air craft carriers had been there and were destroyed the plan to attack pearl harbor was designed to make the US call a truce and stop our oil embargo that stopped their expanison in asia and the pacific. Or at the least temporarily cripple the United states in the pacific. Their plan had never been to defeat the US completly and conquer the US (at least at that point they would have tried later) it was to end their oil embargo that we put on them due to their attrocities in china. The oil embargo made it impossible for them to continue their conquest. The reason they went so hard attacking indonesia was because of its oil fields and thus the us oil embargo would not have mattered and they would only need a truce with the US. If you look at their tactics through the war against the U.S. it was mainly to make us call a truce by making it to costly to go to war with them and make the american public demand a truce.
Also the admiral who planned it knew it was a bad idea to fight the united states but did as he was told. So the japenese attack on pearl harbor was well planned out but failed to achieve it's biggest goals by sheer luck since the air craft carriers had been out on maneuveurs at the time and the japanese didn't find out until the attack was about to start and it was not really possible to call it off at that point since they had sent a fleet half way across the pacific in radio silence to get that "suprise" attack that they needed to make it work and it would have been hard to hide the fact that they sent a fleet almost to hawai and then back. It would have made the US wake up to the threat. So it wasn't them being in denial and saying "it has to work" it was them underestimating the american will to fight.
Sorry I am a history freak and had to respond
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,690
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
8,066
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 18, 2019 21:39:35 GMT
My point was that the entire concept was flawed. You cripple the US fleet and then win the war...... how? The whole concept of establishing a defence perimeter and letting the US exhaust itself against it relied on the war not being an all-out existential struggle, but the attack ensured that's the kind of war they got. But they handwaved those concerns away, because believing that war with the USA was not winnable would mean that the China Incident would have to be wound down, which the militarist regime couldn't afford to believe.
The other flaw was that the Pacific Fleet wouldn't have been able to interfere in the East Indies operation anyway, which adds an ironic gloss to the whole thing. Unmodernized AA, lack of escorts, inadequate fleet train, etc. WPO-3 said the Philippines would be on their own for, what, two years?
Edit: although just attacking the Dutch colonial possessions might have made sense. Strategically superior and operationally dangerous, but if the alternatives are suicidal....
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,940 Likes: 3,178
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,178
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,940
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Aug 18, 2019 22:02:58 GMT
You're starting to sound like someone in deep denial. And I think people here are intentionally overcomplicating things. It's a simple choice; make the game that has the most pull and that will sell you the most copies. Or don't.
No, it's the way the video game industry works.
Look you can make a "great" game and it's still doesn't mean it would sell one copy, and vice versa you can make a "crappy" game and sell 10+ million copies. I think Mass Effect: Andromeda 2 could be a great game if people get over the original trilogy, because IMHO there is a LOT more potential for great stories in Andromeda Galaxy.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 18, 2019 22:05:17 GMT
No. ...and these posts illustrate some of the reasons why: It's sweet. I admit one of my big reasons for wanting another game is to get more time with the crew. I really wish we would have gotten more closure with our crew and LI's. Also was that part in the citadel dlc? Part of the data here. I really don't fucking care what the conclusions were, I just want the OT's unrealized potential be somehow realized, mainly the character development parts and especially the obvious arcs that were dropped because, chop-chop, we got a 18 month deadline to make the biggest game in the trilogy, drop every character and focus on Liara and Garrus exclusively. And remember; best place to start the trilogy! By my count, there are: 20 potential squadmates, most of whom may be dead. 7 other crew members, some optional, some may be dead. (Joker, Chakwas, Michel, Kelly, Traynor, Cortez, Allers). 17 of the above may be current and/or ex LIs. ...and loads of other characters in the world, many of whom may also be dead or have been replaced by substitutes (original/replacement council, Mordin/Wiks, Maelon, Wreav, Eve, Hackett, Anderson, Primarch Victus, Matriarch Aethyta, Aria, Kahlee Sanders, Brynn Cole, Oriana Lawson - to name a few). That's a helluva lot of baggage to carry forward, and it doesn't even begin to address a lot of choices the player may have made. Nevermind that a lot of people used mods, and I'd wager that the vast majority of people who played through MET have their own headcanon about the future. People's attachment to Shepard (and the Milky Way) isn't just about Shepard (or TMW) - it's also about the other characters and relationships Shepard built with them along the way. Unless BioWare fully supports all of those characters - and in all of the possible configurations - they'd likely anger just as many fans as they would attract with a new entry featuring Shepard. The only way I could ever see them doing another game with Shepard would be a prequel - and then you'd be dealing with a very different Shepard. No Normandy, none of the squadmates to whom people are so attached, no Spectre status, perhaps yet unproven. Shepard did not become the CO of a ship until ME1, so we'd be dealing with a Shepard who was maybe a squad leader going on various missions. Is that what people want? No not twenty. Liara,VS (ashley or kaiden),jack,miranda,garrus, and tali are the only ones who would "have to be squadmates" by the logic that they would bring back the LI's. So thats six and the others can be cameos or not at all. Wrex would be leader of the krogan (or wreav) and thus wouldn't have to play a big part. Grunt is leading a unit and thus would not be able to make a squadmate. Zaeed's VA died and thus can't be brought back. Kasumi is a thief so her not joining would make sense,mordin is dead or in hiding,james could easily not show up and it be excused by him trying to find his uncle, javik could come back and i hope he will but he doesn't need to. Of course since so many people had him and he couldn't die it would make sense to bring him back as a mandatory squadmate just like liara,and garrus since most people have him alive. Tali should be alive in most peoples too but I realize it may be harder since she could die in ME2 and in ME3 and her dying in ME3 was linked to people's choice in the geth and quarian war. So thats three madatory and we know they will add at least one new one. So that is between four and seven right there. So it would not be hard and if they went heavy with personal interactions and dialouge it would work and since there are combinations of squademates it adds replayability (though I never let squadmates or characters die unless I have to so I wouldn't be able to replay them like that but most people would). Thane is dead no matter what as well. Kelly was never a squadmate and thus can serve on the ship or not if she died and she can play the part of a shrink since she is trained for it and surely more then one person on the normandy needs one.
Allers doesn't need to be mentioned but I don't think she can die so it's no a variable. Traynor,joker, and cortez are always alive so again not variables. Anderson is always dead so I am not sure why you brought him up. Aria is always alive if I remember right but again doesn't need to play a big part since she is ruler of omega and we might not even go there. Kahlee sanders was only shown once in game and she was close to anderson so she can be mentioned in an email if she is alive and not at all if she is dead and it would work. Hackett is always alive and will likely play a big part no matter what. Liara's mom can be mentioned in passing or not at all and it would likely work. Primarch Victus is alive and would be the leader of palaven and the turians and again either show up or mentioned in passing and wouldn't be a variable. And mordin and miks are dead or in hiding and thus don't need to be brought up unless in a "memorial" type thing and even that is optional. Maelon doesn't need to be mentioned either because he is either dead or running a clinic on omega. The devs said bailey was alive so no variable and doesn't need to show up at all or could get away with a short cameo.
The different council members would be difficult unless you simply say they died in the reaper war (the citadel was attacked by the reapers after all.) and have new ones or just don't show them or only show them once or twice in small scenes and thus limit the resources needed.
Now as for non squadmates they could mostly be mentioned in passing,ignored,or get a small cameo. Oriana could be explained to be helping a colony repair since she had planned to go into colonial development anyways (miranda says this in ME2) or not mentioned at all if she is dead. Doctor chakwas could be mentioned in passing, get a cameo,or not at all if she died in ME2 and that would be fine. Dr.michelle could be the doctor on the normandy.
And as for mods I don't see how that factors in at all since bioware has no responsibility for those and any who thinks they do and are gonna factor them in is kidding themselves.
So I don't see how it would be a massive deal. In truth the biggest problem we would have would be the geth/quarian conflict outcome but as long as we don't go to their homeworld we would probably be fine. Remember before the war there was only 16,000,000 quarians in the galaxy if I remember correctly. And the geth would probably stay in their own space for the most part since people would still be scared of them. So how many quarians would we really meet. I admit they would be wise to put more resources into the (quarian and geth peace or quarian victory ouctomes) because otherwise you just have to say the geth went back to their space and stayed there for the most part and it would easily work.
The devs biggest concern will be bringing back fans of the series and getting more. In the end that involves selling games and that is what this will do. If they get that good will back then they could go back to andromeda and make a game there that is set a few years into the furture from where andromeda left off or maybe more and people would give it a chance not all people would but enough to make a very good profit. People forget that the video game industry is about making money. Brining shepard and crew back is the hook but to reel the fans into bioware again the game needs to be good. My whole argument for this is to bring in more of the old fans to buy these games again so they could get back their good will and make alot of money. (you know new people would buy it too).
And if your scared of a few (not most of the fans but a very small amount) people complaining then you do not belong in the video game business or any business for that matter that involves being around people.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 18, 2019 22:15:30 GMT
And I think people here are intentionally overcomplicating things. It's a simple choice; make the game that has the most pull and that will sell you the most copies. Or don't.
No, it's the way the video game industry works.
Look you can make a "great" game and it's still doesn't mean it would sell one copy, and vice versa you can make a "crappy" game and sell 10+ million copies. I think Mass Effect: Andromeda 2 could be a great game if people get over the original trilogy, because IMHO there is a LOT more potential for great stories in Andromeda Galaxy.
You realize the whole argument for bringing back shepard is for it to be used as a "hook" right. It would sell copies by that alone where as andromeda doesn't generate nearly the same amount of excitment. I think they should make another andromeda game. I actually liked it (though not as much as the original trilogy). However they need to bring people back and get the base amped up again as well and the easiest way to do this would be to bring shepard back and get people interested in MAss effect again. And as for people getting over the original trilogy it has been over seven years since ME3 was released and people are still going on about it. It's safe to say people aren't "getting over it". And again I am not saying they should abandon the amdromeda galaxy. Just make the shepard game first and then when you show EA you can make a great profit and have the good will of fans back (and more importantly show the mass effect series can sell more copies in the future as well) And thus get more mass effect games in andromeda as well.
In truth I really hope they double down on mass effect and have two teams working seperately one on an andromeda game and one a game in the milky way. This probably won't happen of course but I hope they do it. Haviing two teams working at the same time I mean.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 18, 2019 22:49:00 GMT
My point was that the entire concept was flawed. You cripple the US fleet and then win the war...... how? The whole concept of establishing a defence perimeter and letting the US exhaust itself against it relied on the war not being an all-out existential struggle, but the attack ensured that's the kind of war they got. But they handwaved those concerns away, because believing that war with the USA was not winnable would mean that the China Incident would have to be wound down, which the militarist regime couldn't afford to believe. The other flaw was that the Pacific Fleet wouldn't have been able to interfere in the East Indies operation anyway, which adds an ironic gloss to the whole thing. Unmodernized AA, lack of escorts, inadequate fleet train, etc. WPO-3 said the Philippines would be on their own for, what, two years? Edit: although just attacking the Dutch colonial possessions might have made sense. Strategically superior and operationally dangerous, but if the alternatives are suicidal.... I have said that before that they should have avoided american colonies. However the japanese were an empire and empires have to keep expanding or they fall apart (history has shown this). Japans government especially was vulnerable to this at the time because they were very nationalistic and basically told their people they had to keep conquering and that it was their destiny. and stopping would be very dangerous for them (Not explaining it well admittedly).
Yes but in the interest of a truce would the american government of the time really continue to send it's people to die to stop japans actions in china. Even if leaving china alone was part of the agreement they would attack them again anyways and then would have their own oil wells and thus an embargo on oil wouldn't be so harmful to them. Also just because they would temporarily stop in china in order to fight the united states wouldn't mean they would stop expanding. They would have control of the pacific if the war went their way and thus would still be expanding that way and when they were finished they could go back to china. Now whether this was realistic in hindsight it is obvious it wouldn't work. However at the time america was doing everything it could to stay out of the war. The lend lease program with britain was allowed by the public because FDR made it sound like we would be keeping "our" young men from dying in europe by giving the british the tools to fight the germans and italians. FDR knew the U.S. would need to go to war eventually but when 70% of the population (I believe it was that) is dead against going to war you can't do it. This is what the japanese saw. they saw a people who didn't want to go to war and that the president FDR who went to pains to say (I will not take us to war) was accused by his opponets of wanting to go to war. They thought that a quick strike and then an offer of truce would have the american people pressing their government for peace. This was obviously a huge mistake in hindsight but at the time it was not completly unreasonable. It was a massive gamble though and not all the japanese commanders agreed with it.
The other flaw is partially true that we wouldn't have bothered their east india operation anyways however at the same time they wanted the phillipines and that area and having your essential oil wells surrounded by a hostile power is never ideal.
My only point was that they didn't believe it "had" to work and didn't even think it wouldn't. It was well planned and might have worked to some degree.
|
|
Polka Dot
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 679 Likes: 1,207
inherit
10957
0
Feb 14, 2019 20:07:41 GMT
1,207
Polka Dot
679
Feb 14, 2019 18:50:29 GMT
February 2019
polkadot
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by Polka Dot on Aug 19, 2019 0:44:22 GMT
No. ...and these posts illustrate some of the reasons why: By my count, there are: 20 potential squadmates, most of whom may be dead. 7 other crew members, some optional, some may be dead. (Joker, Chakwas, Michel, Kelly, Traynor, Cortez, Allers). 17 of the above may be current and/or ex LIs. ...and loads of other characters in the world, many of whom may also be dead or have been replaced by substitutes (original/replacement council, Mordin/Wiks, Maelon, Wreav, Eve, Hackett, Anderson, Primarch Victus, Matriarch Aethyta, Aria, Kahlee Sanders, Brynn Cole, Oriana Lawson - to name a few). That's a helluva lot of baggage to carry forward, and it doesn't even begin to address a lot of choices the player may have made. Nevermind that a lot of people used mods, and I'd wager that the vast majority of people who played through MET have their own headcanon about the future. People's attachment to Shepard (and the Milky Way) isn't just about Shepard (or TMW) - it's also about the other characters and relationships Shepard built with them along the way. Unless BioWare fully supports all of those characters - and in all of the possible configurations - they'd likely anger just as many fans as they would attract with a new entry featuring Shepard. The only way I could ever see them doing another game with Shepard would be a prequel - and then you'd be dealing with a very different Shepard. No Normandy, none of the squadmates to whom people are so attached, no Spectre status, perhaps yet unproven. Shepard did not become the CO of a ship until ME1, so we'd be dealing with a Shepard who was maybe a squad leader going on various missions. Is that what people want? No not twenty. Yes, TWENTY. There were twenty different possible squadmates throughout the trilogy. The other numbers I quoted are also correct. Okay, so you're proposing that only the squadmates who were LIs return (and most of them could be dead). You neglected to mention Samara/Morinth, Vega, or Javik (one-night stands in the Citadel DLC) though you did acknowledge some non-squadmate LIs (Kelly, Cortez, Traynor, Allers). Here's the problem: Some people have favorites who were not LIs. I believe there are some mods that don't kill off Anderson. A key part of my post that you've ignored is this: I'd wager that the vast majority of people who played through MET have their own headcanon about the future.Guess we forgot about that whole red green blue thing, eh? Or were you assuming a red canon since Shepard is alive? In that case, the geth - along with EDI - would be wiped out. Did we also forget that the relays aren't working? If you plan to have Shepard visiting other planets, you'd need to 1) retcon that, 2) fix 'em all fast, or 3) time skip ahead a fair bit. Otherwise, you might be earthbound. Yes, well, that's always a concern. And new players are always a huge part of the consumer base. Did you know that, on average, only ~ half of the people that buy a game actually complete it? That means that even something like MET has a lot of fan turnover from one game to the next. Uh... okay. Your entire premise is this: I would suggest that the only way that would work is if you give players the Shepard (and setting and favorite supporting cast) they want to play again. You make some references about respecting players' choices, but haven't acknowledged that would require something along the lines of the DA Keep, or possibly a questionnaire players would fill out at the beginning of the game. Note, too, that BioWare isn't developing games the same way they built MET anymore. The new title would likely be a GaaS, possibly open world, possibly co-op, on Frostbite (I'm sure the artists would do their best to make the characters look the same as they did on the previous engine, but hoo baby were there complaints when DA made the change). IOW, it would be vastly different from MET - but by using Shep & Co, you'd be setting a lot of expectations for it.
|
|
Cyberstrike
N4
is wanting to have some fun!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
XBL Gamertag: cyberstrike nTo
PSN: cyberstrike-nTo
Prime Posts: 1,732
Prime Likes: 467
Posts: 1,940 Likes: 3,178
inherit
634
0
May 14, 2017 17:50:43 GMT
3,178
Cyberstrike
is wanting to have some fun!
1,940
August 2016
cyberstrike
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
cyberstrike nTo
cyberstrike-nTo
1,732
467
|
Post by Cyberstrike on Aug 19, 2019 1:43:43 GMT
No, it's the way the video game industry works.
Look you can make a "great" game and it's still doesn't mean it would sell one copy, and vice versa you can make a "crappy" game and sell 10+ million copies. I think Mass Effect: Andromeda 2 could be a great game if people get over the original trilogy, because IMHO there is a LOT more potential for great stories in Andromeda Galaxy.
You realize the whole argument for bringing back shepard is for it to be used as a "hook" right. It would sell copies by that alone where as andromeda doesn't generate nearly the same amount of excitment. I think they should make another andromeda game. I actually liked it (though not as much as the original trilogy). However they need to bring people back and get the base amped up again as well and the easiest way to do this would be to bring shepard back and get people interested in MAss effect again. And as for people getting over the original trilogy it has been over seven years since ME3 was released and people are still going on about it. It's safe to say people aren't "getting over it". And again I am not saying they should abandon the amdromeda galaxy. Just make the shepard game first and then when you show EA you can make a great profit and have the good will of fans back (and more importantly show the mass effect series can sell more copies in the future as well) And thus get more mass effect games in andromeda as well.
In truth I really hope they double down on mass effect and have two teams working seperately one on an andromeda game and one a game in the milky way. This probably won't happen of course but I hope they do it. Haviing two teams working at the same time I mean.
So how about my idea of Shepard being in MEA2 that either be the real Shepard from ME1 and/or another clone created by Cerberus? Set up to be an antagonist or rival of sorts for Ryder to face? That is the ONLY way I would want to see Shepard back.
But honestly I think a lot of people would see BioWare bringing back Shepard and company for another adventure in the MW would be seen as a desperate move to pander fans that either have moved on and/or were never interested in Mass Effect to begin with. Simply put IMHO it's a bad idea to pander to people who don't give a damn anymore or never did give a damn in the first place.
Story based single player RPGs in general don't make as much money as games like Madden and FIFA do for EA. So EA will spend more money on sport games than on a story based single player RPGs no matter how good or bad they are. Also BioWare will never sell a game with CoD numbers and they're delusional to think so. They should set realistic sales goals and focus on meeting realistic sales expectations and not delusions of grandur, for their games would help.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,700
Phantom
2,668
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 19, 2019 2:15:40 GMT
You realize the whole argument for bringing back shepard is for it to be used as a "hook" right. It would sell copies by that alone where as andromeda doesn't generate nearly the same amount of excitment. I think they should make another andromeda game. I actually liked it (though not as much as the original trilogy). However they need to bring people back and get the base amped up again as well and the easiest way to do this would be to bring shepard back and get people interested in MAss effect again. And as for people getting over the original trilogy it has been over seven years since ME3 was released and people are still going on about it. It's safe to say people aren't "getting over it". And again I am not saying they should abandon the amdromeda galaxy. Just make the shepard game first and then when you show EA you can make a great profit and have the good will of fans back (and more importantly show the mass effect series can sell more copies in the future as well) And thus get more mass effect games in andromeda as well.
In truth I really hope they double down on mass effect and have two teams working seperately one on an andromeda game and one a game in the milky way. This probably won't happen of course but I hope they do it. Haviing two teams working at the same time I mean.
So how about my idea of Shepard being in MEA2 that either be the real Shepard from ME1 and/or another clone created by Cerberus? Set up to be an antagonist or rival of sorts for Ryder to face? That is the ONLY way I would want to see Shepard back.
But honestly I think a lot of people would see BioWare bringing back Shepard and company for another adventure in the MW would be seen as a desperate move to pander fans that either have moved on and/or were never interested in Mass Effect to begin with. Simply put IMHO it's a bad idea to pander to people who don't give a damn anymore or never did give a damn in the first place.
Story based single player RPGs in general don't make as much money as games like Madden and FIFA do for EA. So EA will spend more money on sport games than on a story based single player RPGs no matter how good or bad they are. Also BioWare will never sell a game with CoD numbers and they're delusional to think so. They should set realistic sales goals and focus on meeting realistic sales expectations and not delusions of grandur, for their games would help.
that would be interesting to have ME1 Shepard to return as an antagonist......Also I don't see Post ME3 Reaper War Mass Effect game with Shepard and be successful.... I Know that themikefest will disagree with me on that. Maybe with an another Player character.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
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 Aug 19, 2019 11:45:33 GMT
Look you can make a "great" game and it's still doesn't mean it would sell one copy Exactly. You need to make a game that sells copies, first and foremost. I think we've already established that Andromeda 2, right now, won't. And that's regardless of actual game quality. If they can make a great game, they can make it regardless of the Andromeda or Milky Way galaxy. The thing is you can sell Shepard far better than you can sell Andromeda.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2019 12:47:27 GMT
Look you can make a "great" game and it's still doesn't mean it would sell one copy Exactly. You need to make a game that sells copies, first and foremost. I think we've already established that Andromeda 2, right now, won't. And that's regardless of actual game quality. If they can make a great game, they can make it regardless of the Andromeda or Milky Way galaxy. The thing is you can sell Shepard far better than you can sell Andromeda. You keep repeating that Andromeda 2 wouldn't sell, but you have not proven it or actually established it. All you've shown is that ME:A was not as well received as the MET games and denied every bit of evidence that people here have presented to you that ME:A was not the unmitigated disaster you keep wanting to say it was. All you've put forth are meme artists doing what they do to make their living... overtly and audaciously meme and criticize everything for entertainment. Your hero, PewDiePie is currently making an A$$ of hismelf playing Minecraft (OMG - The Floor is Made of Lava).
Even the people here who support a ME3 sequel have indicated that they would not backlash if ME:A2 were put out instead. Most people here have said that what they want first and foremost is a great game.
Sure, it's possible to make a great game and have it not sell gangbusters, but it is highly unlikely that a great game published by a AAA company would not sell a single copy. If Bioware's budget and expectations are reasonable and not dependent on selling copies like CoD, then it would still be a successful launch if the game merely sells in accordance with their expectations. It's true that ME:A did not sell as well as they expected it to, but EA categorically stated that it wasn't a huge loss for them. Yes, they shut down Bioware Montreal, but there is also evidence that could have been planned (to roll it into EA Motive) long before Andromeda was released.
You also have stated yourself that putting Shepard in the game doesn't resolve the issue. It doesn't guarantee huge sales either. A mediocre Shepard game would not sell well and it would likely further taint the opinions of the fans. You're just not listening to the people here who are repeatedly saying they don't want today's Bioware to mess with Shepard.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
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 Aug 19, 2019 13:11:58 GMT
You keep repeating that Andromeda 2 wouldn't sell, but you have not proven it or actually established it I have, but not that you'll admit. Not my hero. Still, the second biggest youtuber behind T-Series and therefore a far, far reaching influencer. Unless you think his video on Andromeda, watched by ~6 million people, was actually helpful. If Bioware's budget and expectations are reasonable and not dependent on selling copies like CoD But they are. link it is highly unlikely that a great game published by a AAA company would not sell a single copy It will sell, just not enough for EA not to shutter a studio. You also have stated yourself that putting Shepard in the game doesn't resolve the issue No, but it helps. It doesn't guarantee huge sales either But it will sell better. A mediocre Shepard game would not sell well And a mediocre Andromeda game would sell far worse. it would like further taint the opinions of the fans I doubt it. We've hit rock bottom. Figuratively everyone and their mother is currently making fun of Bioware. People are actively crying to EA to put Bioware out of their misery. You're just not listening to the people here who are repeatedly saying they don't want today's Bioware to mess with Shepard. I understand that, but Bioware doesn't have a choice at this point. Or, to word it better, they do, it's just not much of a choice.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 19, 2019 19:52:06 GMT
Prequel, set in the late 2170s. Maybe feature the Skyllian Blitz but as a minor part of the story, should be an original story like RDR2.
I'm sick and tied of prequels. They mostly offer very little or next to nothing new and are generally boring as hell, you can't have much suspense and surprise if you know how the story ends. I mean look at the endings of Star Wars III and Star Trek: Enterprise you knew how those series were going to end from the start and neither one did much to help their respective series.
I have seen very very few prequels that weren't horrific. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is the hobbit. However as you said you know how it will end and that hurts it. I really hope they avoid a prequel.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 19, 2019 20:01:18 GMT
Exactly. You need to make a game that sells copies, first and foremost. I think we've already established that Andromeda 2, right now, won't. And that's regardless of actual game quality. If they can make a great game, they can make it regardless of the Andromeda or Milky Way galaxy. The thing is you can sell Shepard far better than you can sell Andromeda. You keep repeating that Andromeda 2 wouldn't sell, but you have not proven it or actually established it. All you've shown is that ME:A was not as well received as the MET games and denied every bit of evidence that people here have presented to you that ME:A was not the unmitigated disaster you keep wanting to say it was. All you've put forth are meme artists doing what they do to make their living... overtly and audaciously meme and criticize everything for entertainment. Your hero, PewDiePie is currently making an A$$ of hismelf playing Minecraft (OMG - The Floor is Made of Lava).
Even the people here who support a ME3 sequel have indicated that they would not backlash if ME:A2 were put out instead. Most people here have said that what they want first and foremost is a great game.
Sure, it's possible to make a great game and have it not sell gangbusters, but it is highly unlikely that a great game published by a AAA company would not sell a single copy. If Bioware's budget and expectations are reasonable and not dependent on selling copies like CoD, then it would still be a successful launch if the game merely sells in accordance with their expectations. It's true that ME:A did not sell as well as they expected it to, but EA categorically stated that it wasn't a huge loss for them. Yes, they shut down Bioware Montreal, but there is also evidence that could have been planned (to roll it into EA Motive) long before Andromeda was released.
You also have stated yourself that putting Shepard in the game doesn't resolve the issue. It doesn't guarantee huge sales either. A mediocre Shepard game would not sell well and it would likely further taint the opinions of the fans. You're just not listening to the people here who are repeatedly saying they don't want today's Bioware to mess with Shepard.
I keep saying that putting shepard back in the game isn't a "fix all" and the game doesn't have to be good but just having shepard would be enough. No I am saying they should have shepard because it will bring more people back with that alone. They will still have to advertise well and make a good game but shepard would be the hook. Also how many people are on this forum. Alot of people aren't still talking about Mass effect when the last game was made two years ago. You need to make fans of the game come back and add more. Bringing back shepard will bring back more old fans and their advertising will bring in more new fans and some more old fans. People are going to complain no matter what but the difference is they will buy the game and that's what is needed. In order to bring back good will for the next andromeda game (which I hope they make after the shepard game) they will have to make it good. So again shepard isn't a fix all but a hook to bring people in.
|
|
inherit
1274
0
3,443
sageoflife
1,578
August 2016
sageoflife
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by sageoflife on Aug 19, 2019 20:11:44 GMT
Shepard's story has been told. It's time to let go and move on.
|
|
inherit
1363
0
Dec 31, 2021 19:39:42 GMT
1,233
garrusfan1
1,826
Aug 30, 2016 16:55:35 GMT
August 2016
garrusfan1
|
Post by garrusfan1 on Aug 19, 2019 20:29:34 GMT
Yes, TWENTY. There were twenty different possible squadmates throughout the trilogy. The other numbers I quoted are also correct. Okay, so you're proposing that only the squadmates who were LIs return (and most of them could be dead). You neglected to mention Samara/Morinth, Vega, or Javik (one-night stands in the Citadel DLC) though you did acknowledge some non-squadmate LIs (Kelly, Cortez, Traynor, Allers). Here's the problem: Some people have favorites who were not LIs. I believe there are some mods that don't kill off Anderson. A key part of my post that you've ignored is this: I'd wager that the vast majority of people who played through MET have their own headcanon about the future.Guess we forgot about that whole red green blue thing, eh? Or were you assuming a red canon since Shepard is alive? In that case, the geth - along with EDI - would be wiped out. Did we also forget that the relays aren't working? If you plan to have Shepard visiting other planets, you'd need to 1) retcon that, 2) fix 'em all fast, or 3) time skip ahead a fair bit. Otherwise, you might be earthbound. Yes, well, that's always a concern. And new players are always a huge part of the consumer base. Did you know that, on average, only ~ half of the people that buy a game actually complete it? That means that even something like MET has a lot of fan turnover from one game to the next. Uh... okay. Your entire premise is this:I would suggest that the only way that would work is if you give players the Shepard (and setting and favorite supporting cast) they want to play again. You make some references about respecting players' choices, but haven't acknowledged that would require something along the lines of the DA Keep, or possibly a questionnaire players would fill out at the beginning of the game. Note, too, that BioWare isn't developing games the same way they built MET anymore. The new title would likely be a GaaS, possibly open world, possibly co-op, on Frostbite (I'm sure the artists would do their best to make the characters look the same as they did on the previous engine, but hoo baby were there complaints when DA made the change). IOW, it would be vastly different from MET - but by using Shep & Co, you'd be setting a lot of expectations for it. I hate the frostbite engine so far but supposedly they are much better at it. The biggest problem with the dragon age characters was that it had the DA2 animation which many people didn't like since it looked very cartoonish (Though I loved DA2).
As for mods letting anderson live it can't be cannon since it wasn't in the game. The fact you are using mods as an argument for this is strange.
We see the relays get fixed. In the slides we hear they were damaged but not destroyed and were fixed. So the relays are fixed already whether it makes sense or not. I figure the game will be five years after ME3 so the crew meets up again.
I know people have their own head cannon. However I am sure most (not all obviously) of the players will welcome a new shepard game. This forum is tiny. Many mass effect fans that my idea would attract are people who play mass effect and love it but don't talk about it for years afterwards. Also one of the biggest complaints about ME3 was the ME2 love interest (except tali and garrus) got ignored except in the citadel dlc. The biggest complaints about characters not in the squad was that. So my idea takes care of that. Yes some people complained about not getting other former squadmates back but the ones that were loudest were miranda and jack.
My idea would need a dragons keep or the mass effect version. I think that is obvious. Ironically by killing the geth in destroy ending it would make the game easier to make since the geth would be gone and the surviving quarians in the galaxy (not all would have joined the fight some would have ignored the call) could go back to their home world. So one of the biggest problems we would have for a big choice would be irrelevant or at least easily bypassed without killing players decisions. Or you could bring back shepard. Unless they decide to say that the geth had a "back up" system or something it would take one of the most difficult decisions to fit in away without retconning our previous choices.
Also samara was a one night stand and morinth is dead no matter what. Not sure why your brought her up. Now as for vega and javik's one night stands they weren't LI's they were one nights stands. And I said we should bring back javik anyways. So again not a problem
|
|