Should bioware do one final shepard game?

Ther's no guarantee it would who knows it's equally possible an MEA 2 might do better. They just need to learn from any mistakes made with the first one. After all I wasn' t that impressed with ME1 to begin with it was only after I played ME2 did I really start to appreciate what the series could become.

The idea of madness through repeated action doesn’t really apply to fictional characters. In this case, that would fall on lack of creativity to find ways to improve upon a character or premise. In that case, it would make no difference. Anyone who thinks that Shepard or the Milky Way setting in and of themselves have the power to make things better are wildly delusional.

What part of game development specifically? Why would we assume that BioWare would ever implement a core system exactly like it was in a previous game? It’s never happened before, so I don’t see much reason to think they would. 

The Lucasfilm comparison would have worked if we were talking only about the first movie. TFA wasn’t great, but there was still room to improve. It still had 2 of the 3 original human characters to work with, and they could have made the most of that, but that opportunity was squandered in the follow-up, then doubled down in the third (though the actual actress’s death can’t be helped). If you want to argue that Andromeda has a singular effect equivalent to the mishandling of a multi-part film series in a massive, multi-billion dollar pop culture fixture by flubbing 3 entire films and at least one spin-off, then that’s fine. I don’t think any video game warrants that, personally.

Regarding brand damage, I can’t help but note the bit of irony. Mass Effect 3’s ending probably remains to this day the franchise’s greatest failure. It took years of investment and essentially shat on all of it, leaving the only possible way forward a remake or a retcon (after all, Andromeda’s existence is the result of that ending). Yet, despite the effect of that ending, you believe that there’s some way to salvage it. Catch is, that would require one of two things: another wait along the course of 3 whole games in a remake to see how it turns out, or a re-release of the original trilogy with an entirely re-written ending, in which case we’re just repurchasing 90% of a product we played almost a decade ago. Why should I judge the prospects of that outcome any more favorably than the alternative?

Whether you intended to or not, you make more of a case for just killing the franchise than trying to save it. 

To put it another way; do you think the problem of ME3 was the core system? The gameplay is always a secondary factor in Bioware's games. It only needs to be serviceable.


We're way past the TFA part. We're currently in post TRoS territory.


Andromeda has none. Unless they plan to dig up Liara again.


No, of course not. You think the entire thing is Andromeda's fault, when in fact it isn't. The problem starts earlier. For ME, at least. With ME3. That was the TLJ moment where the franchise erupted. Andromeda had no chance, because it's just living in the aftermath, just like TRoS. And Andromeda won't fix what was broken before it, unless the plan is to go back and fix ME3, through it, but I don't see Bioware doing that. Why would they? They've doubled down hard enough and long enough that it seems nearly stubborn on their part. In hindsight, Andromeda was a dumb, fun game, just like TRoS was a dumb, fun movie. I'd pick Andromeda over a hundred ME3s. It wouldn't be the first time Bioware makes a dumb, fun game, but it's the first time it was received this bad. And nobody here believes there was a reason behind it. No such thing as "brand damage" hurt Andromeda at all.


You don't say.


At this point, you have to. If ME is to be made viable, it is a necessity.


Depends on the execution. I made a suggestion, the other day. Episodic, expanding each part of the games to do the franchise and setting justice, more crew content, especially for the underutilized crew members, like the entirety of ME2's crew and also allowing Bioware the time to implement all the ideas that were scrapped. You would be effectively be playing an entire new game, with a close enough main plot. Plus the hindsight to overcome the franchise's shortcomings, because now you know where the franchise limped.


I doubt that would work at this point. If it's a "sorry" from Bioware, at best the fanbase will check out completely, instead of hanging around for the next installment. You're still left with a non-viable userbase, after that.

But I've offered the CYOA excuse as an option to continue past the Crucible ending.


Because a ME is in the works. Bioware thawed it out of the ice for that specific reason; to keep making it. And since that's the only game they can make, after Dragon Age, Bioware could choose to make a game that effectively kills them on release, but I doubt that is a good prospect. The industry doesn't work on Hail Marys. Not in the triple A segment, at least. They're welcome to try, though. Hell, how many times have I double dog dared them, so far?

Going back to Star Wars, I think its a prime example of trying to give people what they say they want and prey upon that nostalgia can backfire worse then just moving forward.  The Force Unleashed had a lot of complaints about being nothing more then a recap of the first three episodes.  So they made The Last Jedi as different as you could to make something new and different and going in a different direction.  Then the backlash about that cause Disney to yet again take a massive alteration in course and we got a movie that made the Christmas Special look good with Rise of Skywalker.

Look at Ashley and Kaiden in Mass Effect 3, those were characters people wanted to return in Mass Effect and it seemed to be extremely negative the way they returned in the third game.  Going by what you said it should have been a welcome sight that people enjoyed, but changes were made to the characters and people didn't like those changes.  I cannot see any way that there wouldn't be some kind of change going back to prior games because its not going to be all the same people making the game so there will be different input and directions taken.

Edit: Riker and Troi were well recieved because they felt like Riker and Troi and that was probably due more to Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis, for to me going back to a video game character it would be having different actors fill those roles and not quite getting it.  In a way like Star Trek (2009) happened for people thought Kirk felt off because it wasn't the Kirk they remembered or the emotion that Spock was showing wasn't right.  There were just plenty of other things wrong in those movies that it wasn't raised as loudly, but those complaints were there.

First three? No. It was a New Hope all over again. It was a good spectacle, but it required a lot of concessions to be made, in terms of what you'd expect from in universe continuity. Which people were on board with, but it would be up to the sequels to justify those concessions. Remember, the EU had been decanonized entirely and all those things people loved, Mara Jade, Kyle Katarn etc. had been wiped along with it. Then TLJ hits and I've shared my thought on that one. Let's just say, it didn't justify the concessions that had been made. It had little to do TLJ doing things "different". Because the concessions made by the fanbse to accept the Sequel Trilogy, weren't worth the product they got. Rey had no personality, Finn was a stereotype, Luke was a bum, Han was a failure, Leia was all alone and Poe was barely in the movies. As for the villains, Hrux was incompetent and Kylo was a manchild. Oh, and Snoke died. It wasn't worth what was sacrificed.


Shit, bruh. I love the Christmas Special and I'll take TRoS over TLJ any day of the week and twice on Sunday. TRoS felt more Star Wars, at least, then TLJ ever could hope to. And it had a better Luke, to boot.


It depends on whether you know what to do with these characters or not. It's really not that hard. If it is that hard, making new characters will be even harder, not only because you have no blueprint what to do with them, as you have with Kaidan and Ashley, but because you will have to compare them with the MET crew, well, not have to, but will regardless and on top of that, they will have to stand on their own merit, which they won't. Because none have. We are still hang up on Morrigan with DA and ... Leliana? Maybe? And that's it. Sure, in these here circles we talk about more than that, but outside? Nobody does. And that's how you lose the casuals and most of your market strength. People. Don't. Care. And they don't talk about Ryder, or Cora, or Liam, or even Drax and Vetra, who were ... better received. You just end up with Andromeda 1 v2.0. And it will fare about as well.

But I'll go back to hear Yvonne Strahovski and Courtenay Taylor and I'll play Division to listen to Garrus etc. These things, to the fanbase, have pull. Anything else? People won't care. And if you do a good job, great. Perhaps, with a better studio rep, you can make people more receptive of a new crew. Which they wouldn't be otherwise.

But who is better is subjective. To bring this back to ME, I can say easily that overall I like the crew and squad of MEA over the Shepard Trilogy. Kallo is better than Joker, Lexi is better than Chakwas, Cora is better than Miranda, Suvi is better than anyone, and so on.

Shepard is better than Ryder. Jacob is better than Kosta. Samara is better than the stowaway. Ken and Gabby are better than Gil. space hamster is better than the one in MEA. SR2 is better than the tempest. Javik is better than the Drack, Vetra, Harper and Jaal put together. Earth is a better planet than any planet visited in MEA. The music in the trilogy is better than in MEA. Citadel is better than the Nexus. The trilogy dlc is better than.....oh yeah, what dlc did MEA get?

I would say if we get a new Andromeda game then the chances of it being a direct sequel, and being called 'Andromeda 2' are slim to none.

Apart from anything else, who really wants to play a kinda crappy first entry to a series(that's also fifty hours long)just to fully appreciate the second one?

The fact you are just saying no rather than actually having evidence shows your disagreements are just your subjective opinion. So thank you for proving my point.

Taylor will always be better than the traitor calling himself Kosta.