inherit
4578
0
5,014
griffith82
Hope for the best, plan for the worst
4,259
Mar 15, 2017 21:36:52 GMT
March 2017
griffith82
|
Post by griffith82 on Aug 23, 2019 15:02:48 GMT
This would solve nothing. It will still piss off a large group who chose something else. I "could" live with it as I have no cannon ending I pick all 3 but mostly just destroy and Synthesis. Still it would upset me if I had to always pick the same ending.
|
|
ZaudStorm™
N2
Just an average gamer
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
Origin: ZaudStorm
XBL Gamertag: ZaudStorm
PSN: zarifobayed360
Posts: 121 Likes: 244
inherit
2514
0
244
ZaudStorm™
Just an average gamer
121
Dec 31, 2016 12:41:41 GMT
December 2016
zaudstorm
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem
ZaudStorm
ZaudStorm
zarifobayed360
|
Post by ZaudStorm™ on Aug 23, 2019 15:29:21 GMT
I just don't see the purpose of another Shepard game, his story's over for godsakes.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,174
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,827
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 23, 2019 16:49:08 GMT
I get the feeling that people are using "canon" to mean somewhat different things here. OK define. I"m using it to be the "accepted lore" what represents the actual turn of events in the larger narrative. Right now, the canon lore of ME3 is that there are multiple accepted endings to the game dependent on the player's choices. To declare a singular canon ending is to throw the other endings out of the "accepted lore" of the larger narrative. By creating ME3, they literally threw the death ending of Shepard in ME2 out of the "accepted lore" of the franchise. They even disallowed the importation of the save files that contained that ending. Until that point, it was a valid ending... but now it is not an accepted ending in lore because the events of ME3 made it essentially impossible for those events to have taken place that way. They didn't write ME3 to pick up from any point where Shepard died at the end of ME2; and there is no sequence of events written into the lore that gets us from the point of Shepard disappearing into the abyss and being in detention in ME3. "Accepted" and "valid" meaning -- importable to future games? Or something more? That doesn't follow at all. The idea of going to an off-sheet ending is far worse than canonization. That would mean that the entire trilogy is invalid, because what happens in the trilogy didn't happen in the sequel universe. Whatever Shepard the sequel universe had was faced with different situations than any of our extant Shepards were, since he had an option they didn't get. I don't think you're using hand-waving legitimately there in any case. Control and Synthesis were real choices in a universe with Destroy canonized; it's just that they're choices which the particular Shepard who existed in the sequel's universe declined to make. (IT guys are free to believe otherwise if it makes them happy; not my problem.) It's conceptually no different from importing your second Shepard to ME2 instead of your first Shepard.
|
|
inherit
265
0
11,980
Pounce de León
Praise the Justicat!
7,910
August 2016
catastrophy
caustic_agent
|
Post by Pounce de León on Aug 23, 2019 17:05:22 GMT
Shepard is dead.
|
|
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 Aug 23, 2019 17:38:58 GMT
I just don't see the purpose of another Shepard game, his story's over for godsakes. Money, sales, Bioware's survival. Just to name a few.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,174
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,827
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 23, 2019 20:35:59 GMT
I'm still not convinced that more Shepard would be any more popular with the general population of gamers than it is here. Most potential buyers would be indifferent, so I don't think it matters all that much.
It'd generate a lot of talk, but I don't think it would be good talk.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2019 11:59:37 GMT
OK define. I"m using it to be the "accepted lore" what represents the actual turn of events in the larger narrative. Right now, the canon lore of ME3 is that there are multiple accepted endings to the game dependent on the player's choices. To declare a singular canon ending is to throw the other endings out of the "accepted lore" of the larger narrative. By creating ME3, they literally threw the death ending of Shepard in ME2 out of the "accepted lore" of the franchise. They even disallowed the importation of the save files that contained that ending. Until that point, it was a valid ending... but now it is not an accepted ending in lore because the events of ME3 made it essentially impossible for those events to have taken place that way. They didn't write ME3 to pick up from any point where Shepard died at the end of ME2; and there is no sequence of events written into the lore that gets us from the point of Shepard disappearing into the abyss and being in detention in ME3. "Accepted" and "valid" meaning -- importable to future games? Or something more? That doesn't follow at all. The idea of going to an off-sheet ending is far worse than canonization. That would mean that the entire trilogy is invalid, because what happens in the trilogy didn't happen in the sequel universe. Whatever Shepard the sequel universe had was faced with different situations than any of our extant Shepards were, since he had an option they didn't get. I don't think you're using hand-waving legitimately there in any case. Control and Synthesis were real choices in a universe with Destroy canonized; it's just that they're choices which the particular Shepard who existed in the sequel's universe declined to make. (IT guys are free to believe otherwise if it makes them happy; not my problem.) It's conceptually no different from importing your second Shepard to ME2 instead of your first Shepard. Accepted does mean to an extent "importable" - not necessarily actually imported. It's something that can possibly still stand in the lore... no subsequent events have made it impossible to have happened. Obviously, it's an easier concept to maintain in a game that doesn't offer choices in the first place or in a movie or book where the author has total control over the direction of the story. If an author, however, sets something up in a movie or book that they later make impossible to have happened at all, then they are turning that event into a dream or an impossible event.
The only "adequate" explanation I've seen in sci-fi that makes multiple repeated and collateral events possible are never-ending time loops... but even those ultimately result in time being "corrected" to a proper set of accepted events (where the protag then is satisfied that the universe has been set "right") - a "right" set of events. In that case though, the "right" set of events in invariably something that introduces something new into the timeline... something that makes it right that wasn't there before. So, no, I don't think going "off-sheet" with a new "right" ending is contradictory to the concept. The nature of this fan war is what has set up the need for it. There should be no "favored" ending in the past game that was "right." All should be wrong and the timeline gets redone with the protag taking steps to make the timeline right.
Making ME3 a total dream and starting a new game beyond the Omega 4 relay would undo the timeline and allow Shepard to take a different course of action that leads to a totally different ending. The only thing then that would remain 'out of place" is the possible death of Shepard in ME2 (which is, IMO, already been made an invalid ending when ME3 was released without the ability of import that ending and no provision for carrying the series into the third game without Shepard). ME3 still exists in the canon as a dream (or as the start of a time loop - although so far we have nothing that explains that loop - and that would have to be retconned into the series if the idea of it being a dream is insufficient). As a dream, it would be the mechanism that convinces Shepard to make totally different choices (like choosing to stay beyond the Omega 4 relay) and those different choices are what completely alter the timeline and result in a totally different conclusion, ultimately, to the Reaper threat... in keeping with Anderson's philosophy "There's always another way." The dream would not be a handwave, but rather a pivotal moment.
Dealing with the possible deaths of the ME2 crew is a remaining problem. I would anticipate there would have to be a means of selecting which crew survived at the start of the new game. Two would be the minimum number since that's what it takes to have Shepard survive the end of ME2. Then, there would have to be a means of recruiting additional crew from beyond the Omega 4 relay. If, however, they lock in the choice of turning the Collector Base over to TIM, it could serve as a means for TIM to recruit new crew for Shepard and getting them to him/her while remaining in hiding beyond the realy and exploring that unknown region of the Milky Way for an alternative to fight the eventual next attempt by the Reapers to begin their harvest.
(Sorry, I keep adding, but this is an idea in development... and as I said, I'm more of a general concept thinker than a detailist.)
Also, I would anticipate that, regardless of who or how many of ME2 crew the player selects, they would ultimately have to be unavailable to actually serve for the game. The reason for this would be the sheer number of variables and perhaps unavailability of VA's as well. So, their actual participation in the new game would be limited to the intital "waking up" from romance scene (if applicable) and then some sort of meetup with them providing an excuse why they can't continue with Shepard. As a result, ultimately, the new game would be with an entirely new crew.
If the player wants to start the new game with a new protag rather than Shepard, it could be possibly done by re-validating the Shepard dies ending. If the player selects that option from the ME2 crew selection screen, the game begins with Shepard falling into the abyss and Joker reporting back to TIM... who then recruits the new protag and new crew for the SR2 to continue the mission of securing tech to "fight" the inevitable Reaper invasion.
Alternatively, the ME3 "dream" could take place in the moment when Shepard is deciding whether or not to destroy the base and redoing that scene forward... and he/she reaches the conclusion to turn the base over to TIM (no choice available to player) and actively deciding to remain a fugitive and not return to the Alliance. Then, if the player decided they wanted a new protag, Shepard would die as he/she could in ME2 and the game would continue as described in the previous paragraph.
This has an advantage of allowing players to decide whether or not they want to continue with Shepard and, as I said, the events of ME3 still exist as a pivotal forethought (dream) that causes Shepard to make the decision to turn over the base to TIM and remain a fugitive... thereby, changing us to a totally different course of actual events because Shepard did not want to actually go down the path that ME3 took... seeing that finding the necessary tech to beat the Reapers was unlikely to be found with the then known parts of the Milky Way. "We've known about the archives for years..."
They could even incorporate the "decision platform" scene from ME3 into the new game by having a morph scene to show that platform Shepard is actually standing on is the platform on the Collector Base from ME2. So, redraft here - Game begins with the conversation with TIM about whether or not to destroy the Collector base, scene morphs to show some clips from ME3 - the beginning looking out the window at the boy (with some changes to clearly show Shepard in detention) morphing to the VS getting hurt, Thane dying, Anderson dying, the fleet getting decimated, the relays exploding (with whatever color ending the player decides from the initial selection screen) and then to the decision platform. Then morphing again to show Shepard still on the ME2 platform and then, outside the player's control, deciding to turn the base over to TIM because going back to the Alliance, in Shepard's mind, is the wrong choice that leads to no good outcome)... then the idea continuing as before.
|
|
LogicGunn
N3
I'll relinquish one bullet. Where do you want it?
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: LogicGunn
PSN: LogicGunn
Posts: 868 Likes: 1,715
inherit
2060
0
1,715
LogicGunn
I'll relinquish one bullet. Where do you want it?
868
November 2016
logicgunn
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LogicGunn
LogicGunn
|
Post by LogicGunn on Aug 24, 2019 16:03:29 GMT
Too convoluted and polarizing. I think the whole point of the exercise in the endings was to make it impossible to continue Sheppard's story. They did a good job of that. Sheppard's arc is done now, and frankly, even if they did pick a canon ending and subplot the rest of them, where could they go from that?
|
|
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 24, 2019 23:20:55 GMT
Also, no solution works for "everyone." That you purport to have a solution for "everyone" in your title also weakens your proposal. At the bottom line, it's just more of the same old garbage... trying to ram "high EMS destroy" down the throats of anyone who didn't choose it and doesn't want to choose it now. The ONLY fair way is for EVERYONE to have to give up their notion of the "right" ending. Bioware... please, if you declare a canon, declare a canon that was not anyone's option to choose at the end of ME3. Then, to shut people up, insert modding support (i.e. sell them a creation kit as DLC) and let them do whatever they like after that. Calm down. I didn't "shove" anything. My poll had different ranges rather then just will this work with everyone. I was asking IF this would work. If you read the post you would realize that. And no I don't know how many people had the javik dlc but it has to be far more then those who don't. It was clearly meant to be in the main game but got seperated as dlc. Now if you don't like my idea that is fine but don't get so angry. And I don't expect EVERYONE to be happy. There are people who win the lottery and complain they have to pay taxes afterwards. So I know that there will never be a way to make EVERYONE happy. But I could settle for most. And yeah there is a big difference.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,255
themikefest
14,809
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Aug 24, 2019 23:25:04 GMT
And no I don't know how many people had the javik dlc but it has to be far more then those who don't. It was clearly meant to be in the main game but got seperated as dlc. Yep https://www.reddit.com/r/masseffect/comments/1wyz7e/some_interesting_facts_about_me3s_development/
|
|
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 24, 2019 23:25:54 GMT
I get the feeling that people are using "canon" to mean somewhat different things here. OK define. I"m using it to be the "accepted lore" what represents the actual turn of events in the larger narrative. Right now, the canon lore of ME3 is that there are multiple accepted endings to the game dependent on the player's choices. To declare a singular canon ending is to throw the other endings out of the "accepted lore" of the larger narrative. By creating ME3, they literally threw the death ending of Shepard in ME2 out of the "accepted lore" of the franchise. They even disallowed the importation of the save files that contained that ending. Until that point, it was a valid ending... but now it is not an accepted ending in lore because the events of ME3 made it essentially impossible for those events to have taken place that way. They didn't write ME3 to pick up from any point where Shepard died at the end of ME2; and there is no sequence of events written into the lore that gets us from the point of Shepard disappearing into the abyss and being in detention in ME3.
Every "proposal" for using high EMS destroy as canon has at it's root the desire to eliminate the other endings as possibilities and elevate that ending to being the "right one." Were that not the case, the proponents of it would be perfectly happy with just relegating that ending to a "dream" along with all the others. Give it an equal hand-wave treatment and make canon out of something totally off sheet then. What's fair for the goose should also be fair for the gander. If hand waving synthesis and control should be OK with me, then hand waving destroy right along with it should be OK for everyone else too. Bioware, if you want to bring Shepard back - make all of ME3 a dream. If you don't, re-validate the Shepard dies at the end of ME2 ending. Simple as that. Your talking about retconning an entire game. That is a big difference. You want to say that they change the entire ending fine that could work if done right. But what your proposing makes no sense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2019 23:59:50 GMT
OK define. I"m using it to be the "accepted lore" what represents the actual turn of events in the larger narrative. Right now, the canon lore of ME3 is that there are multiple accepted endings to the game dependent on the player's choices. To declare a singular canon ending is to throw the other endings out of the "accepted lore" of the larger narrative. By creating ME3, they literally threw the death ending of Shepard in ME2 out of the "accepted lore" of the franchise. They even disallowed the importation of the save files that contained that ending. Until that point, it was a valid ending... but now it is not an accepted ending in lore because the events of ME3 made it essentially impossible for those events to have taken place that way. They didn't write ME3 to pick up from any point where Shepard died at the end of ME2; and there is no sequence of events written into the lore that gets us from the point of Shepard disappearing into the abyss and being in detention in ME3.
Every "proposal" for using high EMS destroy as canon has at it's root the desire to eliminate the other endings as possibilities and elevate that ending to being the "right one." Were that not the case, the proponents of it would be perfectly happy with just relegating that ending to a "dream" along with all the others. Give it an equal hand-wave treatment and make canon out of something totally off sheet then. What's fair for the goose should also be fair for the gander. If hand waving synthesis and control should be OK with me, then hand waving destroy right along with it should be OK for everyone else too. Bioware, if you want to bring Shepard back - make all of ME3 a dream. If you don't, re-validate the Shepard dies at the end of ME2 ending. Simple as that. Your talking about retconning an entire game. That is a big difference. You want to say that they change the entire ending fine that could work if done right. But what your proposing makes no sense. It's not a proposal. I stand by the notion that it is Bioware who should be writing the next ME game... not the fans... and my preference remains ME:A2 with Ryder. I'm saying there are many other ways to do it other than High EMS destroy. You're the one who contends that it is so obvious that High EMS Destroy is the ONLY way. I disagree. There are innumerable ways to do it... including the option of relegating the entirely of ME3 into a dream or a time-looping event. Time-loops have been used by other series, including Star Trek; and some movies, including Groundhog Day, The Edge of Tomorrow and Dr. Strange. It's an accepted sci-fi technique and would, if used, allow for a completely different ending or set of endings to the Reaper Conflict that does not necessitate the making of any single ending of ME3 canon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 0:32:49 GMT
Also, no solution works for "everyone." That you purport to have a solution for "everyone" in your title also weakens your proposal. At the bottom line, it's just more of the same old garbage... trying to ram "high EMS destroy" down the throats of anyone who didn't choose it and doesn't want to choose it now. The ONLY fair way is for EVERYONE to have to give up their notion of the "right" ending. Bioware... please, if you declare a canon, declare a canon that was not anyone's option to choose at the end of ME3. Then, to shut people up, insert modding support (i.e. sell them a creation kit as DLC) and let them do whatever they like after that. Calm down. I didn't "shove" anything. My poll had different ranges rather then just will this work with everyone. I was asking IF this would work. If you read the post you would realize that. And no I don't know how many people had the javik dlc but it has to be far more then those who don't. It was clearly meant to be in the main game but got seperated as dlc. Now if you don't like my idea that is fine but don't get so angry. And I don't expect EVERYONE to be happy. There are people who win the lottery and complain they have to pay taxes afterwards. So I know that there will never be a way to make EVERYONE happy. But I could settle for most. And yeah there is a big difference. Then why don't you retitle the thread then?... "Finally figured out a way to make a shepard game that would work for everyone (and every ending), ed" is not a question and does imply that you think that what you're proposing, would work for everyone and every ending. Your second sentence in your OP is also not a question and states: "Obviously the only way to bring shepard back would be to go with the high ems destroy ending. “
The rest is just trying to blow smoke up the butts of the people who didn't choose it. It still would be canon. Your poll really only asks if it would pull the wool over our eyes. Sorry, in my case, it doesn't.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,174
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,827
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 25, 2019 14:00:14 GMT
Well, that premise isn't wrong. Disintegrated and blown-up Shepards can't come back, can they? (Assuming massive retcons are out-of-scope, which is another premise, yes.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 14:25:59 GMT
Well, that premise isn't wrong. Disintegrated and blown-up Shepards can't come back, can they? (Assuming massive retcons are out-of-scope, which is another premise, yes.) Even if you say that bringing back Shepard from a low EMS canon destroy ending isn't impossible in the MEU, who pays for it? (TIM is dead, Cerberus is gone, and the Alliance really doesn't have a need for him/her - the job is done after all. Miranda might pay for it to be her lover back, but that only applies to the percentage of BroShep's who romanced her through to the end of ME3). I would say making the destroy ending canon and bringing Shep back definitively does still render Synthesis and Control completely invalid, particularly since the basis of Synthesis IS the dispersal of Shepard's essence and the basis of Control is that Shepard exists eternally outside of his/her body. I'm not going to go again into a religious argument over this... sorry to disappoint.
To ultimately even explain those two endings in a situation where all roads ultimately lead to High EMS destroy involves a massive retcon anyways. To me, the more acceptable retcon then (if you're going to insist on a Shepard-based sequel) is to relegate ME3 to a dream, which allows it to continue to exist as a dream in its entirely, effectively unchanged, regardless of the ending chosen. It becomes something Shepard thought about doing, but ultimately discarded as being not a desired course of action. The retcon itself is actually pretty minor... just enough to show it as a thought rather than reality... and then just taking the reality off in an entirely different direction (not necessarily how and where I did it...Bioware's choice instead).
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,255
themikefest
14,809
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Aug 25, 2019 15:36:49 GMT
Of course the same argument would be making one ending canon. As I mentioned many times before, the guy did say the details have changed over time. Look at the details that changed from when ME3 was released to when the cut was released.
|
|
inherit
3439
0
9,174
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,827
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Aug 25, 2019 15:42:51 GMT
Well, that premise isn't wrong. Disintegrated and blown-up Shepards can't come back, can they? (Assuming massive retcons are out-of-scope, which is another premise, yes.) Even if you say that bringing back Shepard from a low EMS canon destroy ending isn't impossible in the MEU, who pays for it? (TIM is dead, Cerberus is gone, and the Alliance really doesn't have a need for him/her - the job is done after all. Miranda might pay for it to be her lover back, but that only applies to the percentage of BroShep's who romanced her through to the end of ME3). I would say making the destroy ending canon and bringing Shep back definitively does still render Synthesis and Control completely invalid, particularly since the basis of Synthesis IS the dispersal of Shepard's essence and the basis of Control is that Shepard exists eternally outside of his/her body. I'm not going to go again into a religious argument over this... sorry to disappoint.
To ultimately even explain those two endings in a situation where all roads ultimately lead to High EMS destroy involves a massive retcon anyways. To me, the more acceptable retcon then (if you're going to insist on a Shepard-based sequel) is to relegate ME3 to a dream, which allows it to continue to exist as a dream in its entirely, effectively unchanged, regardless of the ending chosen. It becomes something Shepard thought about doing, but ultimately discarded as being not a desired course of action. The retcon itself is actually pretty minor... just enough to show it as a thought rather than reality... and then just taking the reality off in an entirely different direction (not necessarily how and where I did it...Bioware's choice instead).
Agreed in part. I was assuming that low EMS Destroy Shepards aren't coming back. which has the advantage of preserving the integrity of the breath clip, and there's nothing to bring back in Control and Synthesis. (Well, we could have a game where we play the Sheplyst, but that would be in a different genre.) But, again, I don't agree that all roads lead to high EMS Destroy. It's just that some roads don't go to the sequel, they go to some other version of the MEU. And for the record, saying that such a game would work is not the same thing as endorsing the concept. I think such a game would be an anticlimactic flop. But I'd be offended by the anticlimax, not that I couldn't play all of my Shepards in it. (I didn't play my US Wardens in DA: Awakening either.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 19:02:40 GMT
Even if you say that bringing back Shepard from a low EMS canon destroy ending isn't impossible in the MEU, who pays for it? (TIM is dead, Cerberus is gone, and the Alliance really doesn't have a need for him/her - the job is done after all. Miranda might pay for it to be her lover back, but that only applies to the percentage of BroShep's who romanced her through to the end of ME3). I would say making the destroy ending canon and bringing Shep back definitively does still render Synthesis and Control completely invalid, particularly since the basis of Synthesis IS the dispersal of Shepard's essence and the basis of Control is that Shepard exists eternally outside of his/her body. I'm not going to go again into a religious argument over this... sorry to disappoint.
To ultimately even explain those two endings in a situation where all roads ultimately lead to High EMS destroy involves a massive retcon anyways. To me, the more acceptable retcon then (if you're going to insist on a Shepard-based sequel) is to relegate ME3 to a dream, which allows it to continue to exist as a dream in its entirely, effectively unchanged, regardless of the ending chosen. It becomes something Shepard thought about doing, but ultimately discarded as being not a desired course of action. The retcon itself is actually pretty minor... just enough to show it as a thought rather than reality... and then just taking the reality off in an entirely different direction (not necessarily how and where I did it...Bioware's choice instead).
Agreed in part. I was assuming that low EMS Destroy Shepards aren't coming back. which has the advantage of preserving the integrity of the breath clip, and there's nothing to bring back in Control and Synthesis. (Well, we could have a game where we play the Sheplyst, but that would be in a different genre.) But, again, I don't agree that all roads lead to high EMS Destroy. It's just that some roads don't go to the sequel, they go to some other version of the MEU. And for the record, saying that such a game would work is not the same thing as endorsing the concept. I think such a game would be an anticlimactic flop. But I'd be offended by the anticlimax, not that I couldn't play all of my Shepards in it. (I didn't play my US Wardens in DA: Awakening either.) Fair enough. It's honestly part of the problem for me. I also feel it's unnecessary... so why not treat all the decisions made the same? Dismiss them all or dismiss none of them to an equal degree. Roll the timeline back and have Shepard actually permanently prevent the Reapers from ever starting the harvest.
I can't predict whether any ME game, whether based on a sequel to the MET or ME:A would be anticlimactic... that depends on what they write and how they write it. I do anticipate that, given the nature of the prequel events we know about, a game based on a prequel would have a real tough time not being anticlimactic.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,663
Phantom
2,657
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 25, 2019 19:16:49 GMT
If IT became canon, there shall be rivers of salty tears.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2019 21:13:01 GMT
If IT became canon, there shall be rivers of salty tears. What I don't get is why whenever anyone suggests that ME3 is a thought process that it equates to IT? Shepard does not have to be indoctrinated to consider his/her options ahead of time, speculating on where they might lead, and ultimately reject a course of action that he/she foresees would lead to that speculated end. Speculating is something we do here every single day... sometimes speculating wildly and sometimes writing up elaborate scenarios. Newsflash, we are NOT indoctrinated by Reapers.
Playing the "it's IT card" every time such an alternative is suggested is just another cheap way to try corner Bioware into the "High EMS Destroy" is the ONLY alternative" mentality.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,663
Phantom
2,657
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 25, 2019 22:17:25 GMT
If IT became canon, there shall be rivers of salty tears. What I don't get is why whenever anyone suggests that ME3 is a thought process that it equates to IT? Shepard does not have to be indoctrinated to consider his/her options ahead of time, speculating on where they might lead, and ultimately reject a course of action that he/she foresees would lead to that speculated end. Speculating is something we do here every single day... sometimes speculating wildly and sometimes writing up elaborate scenarios. Newsflash, we are NOT indoctrinated by Reapers.
Playing the "it's IT card" every time such an alternative is suggested is just another cheap way to try corner Bioware into the "High EMS Destroy" is the ONLY alternative" mentality.
Well that is first sign of Indoctrination is denial of indoctrination. The more you fight the idea that we were indoctrinated, the tighter the grip of Reaper Indoctrination. Serious note: I do foresee the Rivers of Salty Tears if Bioware confirms Indoctrination Theory. As for me, I will make popcorn as usual. And those that want to resist Indoctrination or at least cure their indoctrination, I shall make pineapple pizza with ham. For It is heresy, and Reaper's indoctrination will be negated by the pineapple pizza.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
24,255
themikefest
14,809
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Aug 25, 2019 22:28:16 GMT
I like to have my pineapple pizza to include onions and mushrooms.
|
|
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 25, 2019 23:25:37 GMT
Well, that premise isn't wrong. Disintegrated and blown-up Shepards can't come back, can they? (Assuming massive retcons are out-of-scope, which is another premise, yes.) Even if you say that bringing back Shepard from a low EMS canon destroy ending isn't impossible in the MEU, who pays for it? (TIM is dead, Cerberus is gone, and the Alliance really doesn't have a need for him/her - the job is done after all. Miranda might pay for it to be her lover back, but that only applies to the percentage of BroShep's who romanced her through to the end of ME3 Would that even be possible post-trilogy? Miranda killed Wilson (the Chief Medical Officer for the project) and Cerberus is history. Unless Miranda kept detailed records and can form another medical team with the right skills, I'd guess the tech that made Lazarus possible is gone. I can't predict whether any ME game, whether based on a sequel to the MET or ME:A would be anticlimactic... that depends on what they write and how they write it. I do anticipate that, given the nature of the prequel events we know about, a game based on a prequel would have a real tough time not being anticlimactic. Personally, I don't see how it could avoid being an anticlimactic flop. Shepard was pretty much Space Jeezus who saved the entire galaxy. Any possible follow-up to that would be a big fat meh imho.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
10036
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2019 0:37:16 GMT
What I don't get is why whenever anyone suggests that ME3 is a thought process that it equates to IT? Shepard does not have to be indoctrinated to consider his/her options ahead of time, speculating on where they might lead, and ultimately reject a course of action that he/she foresees would lead to that speculated end. Speculating is something we do here every single day... sometimes speculating wildly and sometimes writing up elaborate scenarios. Newsflash, we are NOT indoctrinated by Reapers.
Playing the "it's IT card" every time such an alternative is suggested is just another cheap way to try corner Bioware into the "High EMS Destroy" is the ONLY alternative" mentality.
Well that is first sign of Indoctrination is denial of indoctrination. The more you fight the idea that we were indoctrinated, the tighter the grip of Reaper Indoctrination. Serious note: I do foresee the Rivers of Salty Tears if Bioware confirms Indoctrination Theory. As for me, I will make popcorn as usual. And those that want to resist Indoctrination or at least cure their indoctrination, I shall make pineapple pizza with ham. For It is heresy, and Reaper's indoctrination will be negated by the pineapple pizza. Well, since you all do more speculating around here than I do... and I'm often the 'wait to see" voice... I guess you're all more indoctrinated than I and living in greater denial than I am. Seriously, I'm just giving up. Have it whatever your way you want. I've got things going on and I really just don't care anymore.
|
|
inherit
1227
0
3,663
Phantom
2,657
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Aug 26, 2019 0:41:57 GMT
Well that is first sign of Indoctrination is denial of indoctrination. The more you fight the idea that we were indoctrinated, the tighter the grip of Reaper Indoctrination. Serious note: I do foresee the Rivers of Salty Tears if Bioware confirms Indoctrination Theory. As for me, I will make popcorn as usual. And those that want to resist Indoctrination or at least cure their indoctrination, I shall make pineapple pizza with ham. For It is heresy, and Reaper's indoctrination will be negated by the pineapple pizza. Well, since you all do more speculating around here than I do... and I'm often the 'wait to see" voice... I guess you're all more indoctrinated than I and living in greater denial than I am. Seriously, I'm just giving up. Have it whatever your way you want. I've got things going on and I really just don't care anymore. Well Do you realize that we speculating because we are bored? Also sometimes People can't tell if another is joking or not.
|
|