-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jason Schreier - A new Mass Effect is in early development at BioWare
- Thread starter Deleted member 8196
- Start date
This.
Advance the Andromeda branch a few hundred years have the Milky Way races expand and adapt. Have that adaption cause conflict between those races. Have the peacekeeping force investigate and solve the conflict
Although I believe this is the only way a game in Andromeda can work, we're talking about a soft reboot of a soft reboot. I think it's simply not worth it. The Andromeda Initiative is just too dumb, and so are a lot of the decisions involved in building the game's lore like the new races and the ancient alien tech.
Forgetting Andromeda ever existed is the best first step in the development of the new ME game.
SO Shepard is breathing.., we know he/she chose to destroy the Reapers, it's what he/she was always aiming to do.
So, what's left of the Alliance finds him/her. Humanity and the other alien races have to band together to try and rebuild the Mass Relays. Technology for all civilizations stalls for a while, life becomes a tad simpler in the Milky Way.. until a new enemy approaches.
Please Casey, give us Mass Effect 4, lets pretend Andromeda didn't exist, and broke our hearts with how bad it was.
So, what's left of the Alliance finds him/her. Humanity and the other alien races have to band together to try and rebuild the Mass Relays. Technology for all civilizations stalls for a while, life becomes a tad simpler in the Milky Way.. until a new enemy approaches.
Please Casey, give us Mass Effect 4, lets pretend Andromeda didn't exist, and broke our hearts with how bad it was.
Is Edmonton doing this and Dragon Age 4? I can see one working out at most but not both. They just don´t have the right people at the top to turn out 2 good AAA behemoths at the same time, no matter how many people they employ. I would prefer a full remake of MS 1, in the vain of REmake, than some new trilogy starter. They need a safe bet. Especially after the bad ending of ME 3 (the extended cut is ok) and the disaster of Andromeda. The brand needs healing.
betting both this and dragon age get canceled or put on indefinite hold when they need all hands on deck to finish the anthem remake
which will still be a broken mess
which will still be a broken mess
Do another soft reboot, only way to go since Andromeda didn't capitalize on the story and concept it had.
Mass Effect can easily recover from Andromeda. Call the new game "Mass Effect 4", put it in the same universe as the first 3 with some of the same characters. And then release it maybe 6 months after the Mass Effect trilogy remaster/remake. And for the love of the Reapers, make it good! Take your time!
doomsaying is the only entertainment i'll get from bioware these days
Yeah, no, I don't believe they can do it.
A good Mass Effect should be more linear, focus on narrative and not on exploring boring, empty planets (of course the idea of exploration and visiting planets is super important but you know what I mean). And EA just won't allow their first party studio to make traditional single-player AAA game without open world and GaaS elements. I just don't believe it.
A good Mass Effect should be more linear, focus on narrative and not on exploring boring, empty planets (of course the idea of exploration and visiting planets is super important but you know what I mean). And EA just won't allow their first party studio to make traditional single-player AAA game without open world and GaaS elements. I just don't believe it.
Yeah, this is pretty much the only ending they can pick that's not stupid (Synthesis) or anti-thetical to the story progression of the trilogy (Control).
I don't even care if Shepard is confirmed dead, just give me Destroy + Geth surviving and actually deal with the consequences of fucking up the setting in ME3.
Yup. This alone is a super interesting setup that could be taken in many many different but interesting ways.
I've written up a ton on what they could do. But really what I would like to see is a fractured and isolated galaxy. Mass Relays are all out of wack and not working fully or at all. Have galaxy cut up into varioud pockets and regions that have been cut off from one another for decades after the war and are only just now reconnecting with one another. New government and societies have developed. Some offshoots of a single species, others a conglomeration of several species working together to survive. Some regions have prospered, as best one can after near annihilation, while others have barely hung on. How would some groups cope with decades of not fully knowing if the Reapers are truly gone. How would they manage after near total societal collapse, lost of connection to their home worlds and people. What would some do to survive. And what might we find in those uncharted regions of space previously left untouched outside of the Mass Relay network. What societies and species may be out there that have developed but never touched Reaper tech?
Forgetting Andromeda exists you get left with the same problem that caused the existence of Andromeda.
How do you build off the Ending of Mass Effect 3 aka a game without an ending (or 3 equally hated endings)
I'm not sure there is a better conceptual answer to that then what Andromeda did. Andromeda was essentially the right idea with execution so bad that it poisoned the well.
That Essentially leaves 2 Options.
1. Mass Effect Trillogy Remake
Released as a single game it presents a re-edited canon narrative, that works as a complete experience and provides a staging point for a sequel series.
2. Mass Effect: Reapers of The Old Citadel
A prequel set during the fall of the Protheans . Just like KotOR it's far enough back that it feels both familiar and connected but still seperate enough to be its own thing.
All are equally flawed options. I like the idea of an Andromeda fast forward, and you can still get closure on the Milky Way storyline in a sequel that rejoins the timeline (Reapers get to Andromeda or New United Milky Way force/Group comes to Andromeda
This is the crux of it. We can speculate and hope all we want, but ultimately money and greed prevails.
I just have no hope for a linear singleplayer-focused game under EA, especially since it's a vast sci-fi universe, you just know EA are wanking themselves over the monetization schemes.
This is why we can't have nice things. I'd take a simple ME trilogy remaster over a new GaaS ME any day of the week.
First off I hate the ending, but regardless of personal viewpoint I fully believe the intent goes as follows:
-Control: Paragon/Ambiguous
-Synthesis: Compromise/Peace
-Destroy: Renegade/Selfish
Control by itself sounds bad because you're fulfilling the goal of the game's antagonist, however you aren't the antagonist so what you'll do with it depends on who your character has become, which changes depending on Paragon or Renegade.
Synthesis is the intended solution that answers directly to what you're told to solve at the end. The Reapers are apparently not the seed of the issue, it's the issues with organic/synthetic life, and Synthesis is the only choice that doesn't look to alternatives and outs, it simply changes how existence works so the problem no longer exists. In both other choices you would still deal with how to avert the problem for the future.
Destroy, you're literally killing synthetic life including some of your friends to achieve the game-goal. Stop the Reapers from killing the current cycle. It's renegade because once you have the other two choices you would be a dick to attempt securing your own life and sacrifice syntehtic beings in order to kill the Reapers. It's typical renegade as all previous Renegade choices: "The end justifies the means; Get the job done."
There is no way in hell there's an actual morality swap to "trick" you. It was done, somewhat ambiguously, but ultimately it's not a trick, it's a recontextualization of the meaning of being a hero or a selfish anti-hero, and Destroy is designed for players who just wanted the regular "good defeats evil" ending, but colored in a negative light because defeating evil now requires to sacrifice others but yourself, which is a reversal of the hero's sacrifice ending that the ending is even going for. (The fact that you kill others is also arbitrary, which is why the whole thing is contrived, but the thought-experiment still ultimately does what they intended).
And I'm firing blanket bullets here. I cannot prove it's what they intended when they never want to confirm any of it, which I think is good because art should be left to speak for itself and not be explained to the audience. I'm just saying I believe there's an intention behind the way they're laid out and it's not a trick and Control is a more paragon option than Destroy, given that you have a paragon Shepard.
And to add to the latter statement, consider that if you pick one paragon option in either game while renegading everything else, does that make you a good person either? No, Shepard is in bad light because he's an asshole already, and paragon only makes him seem more psychopathic. You can choose it but you still ultimately end up as a bad person, and thusly Control Renegade ends as being the "Blue/Paragon" colored ending while the epilogue for Renegade Shepard is an actual no-good, "dominate the galaxy" type of closer compared to Control Paragon.
Synthesis is the intended solution that answers directly to what you're told to solve at the end. The Reapers are apparently not the seed of the issue, it's the issues with organic/synthetic life, and Synthesis is the only choice that doesn't look to alternatives and outs, it simply changes how existence works so the problem no longer exists. In both other choices you would still deal with how to avert the problem for the future.
Destroy, you're literally killing synthetic life including some of your friends to achieve the game-goal. Stop the Reapers from killing the current cycle. It's renegade because once you have the other two choices you would be a dick to attempt securing your own life and sacrifice syntehtic beings in order to kill the Reapers. It's typical renegade as all previous Renegade choices: "The end justifies the means; Get the job done."
There is no way in hell there's an actual morality swap to "trick" you. It was done, somewhat ambiguously, but ultimately it's not a trick, it's a recontextualization of the meaning of being a hero or a selfish anti-hero, and Destroy is designed for players who just wanted the regular "good defeats evil" ending, but colored in a negative light because defeating evil now requires to sacrifice others but yourself, which is a reversal of the hero's sacrifice ending that the ending is even going for. (The fact that you kill others is also arbitrary, which is why the whole thing is contrived, but the thought-experiment still ultimately does what they intended).
And I'm firing blanket bullets here. I cannot prove it's what they intended when they never want to confirm any of it, which I think is good because art should be left to speak for itself and not be explained to the audience. I'm just saying I believe there's an intention behind the way they're laid out and it's not a trick and Control is a more paragon option than Destroy, given that you have a paragon Shepard.
And to add to the latter statement, consider that if you pick one paragon option in either game while renegading everything else, does that make you a good person either? No, Shepard is in bad light because he's an asshole already, and paragon only makes him seem more psychopathic. You can choose it but you still ultimately end up as a bad person, and thusly Control Renegade ends as being the "Blue/Paragon" colored ending while the epilogue for Renegade Shepard is an actual no-good, "dominate the galaxy" type of closer compared to Control Paragon.
Mike Gamble seems like a nice guy who's passionate about Bioware and his work. But my concerns with the IP and Bioware as a studio remain. I remember Mike championing ME:A and Anthem, which is expected from a studio figure when discussing them upcoming work; it's left me much more cautions and skeptical regarding what Bioware is saying about a game, vs what the game actually is.
Mass Effect Andromeda: [in response to early EA Access commentary] "Just wait, it only gets better!" 86 hours and 100% campaign completion and it never did.
Anthem: "This is only the begining!" I played the beta for a weekend and that was enough for me.
I wish him and the Bioware team the best. There's still great potential with this IP. I'd absolutely LOVE to be proven wrong. I want to be excited for Mass Effect and Bioware again.
Mass Effect Andromeda: [in response to early EA Access commentary] "Just wait, it only gets better!" 86 hours and 100% campaign completion and it never did.
Anthem: "This is only the begining!" I played the beta for a weekend and that was enough for me.
I wish him and the Bioware team the best. There's still great potential with this IP. I'd absolutely LOVE to be proven wrong. I want to be excited for Mass Effect and Bioware again.
Last edited:
Not sure how anyone can believe this after reading the Kotaku article about what went wrong. That was thoroughly a mismanagement issue at Bioware and the game coming together at the very last minute.
They should piss everyone off and go with the synthesis ending!
Honestly though, I really do think it should be a direct sequel to the original trilogy, but go with the ending that made the most sense...A united galactic front against the Reapers actually works. This would have been the first time in any cycle that the Reapers weren't successful in completely infiltrating and fracturing the unification between races. Also, the Geth being allied should have made a big difference. This would allow much deeper exploration of a universe that was already well realized, allow the Mass Relays to still be a thing, and allow the them to build off of establish characters.
Honestly though, I really do think it should be a direct sequel to the original trilogy, but go with the ending that made the most sense...A united galactic front against the Reapers actually works. This would have been the first time in any cycle that the Reapers weren't successful in completely infiltrating and fracturing the unification between races. Also, the Geth being allied should have made a big difference. This would allow much deeper exploration of a universe that was already well realized, allow the Mass Relays to still be a thing, and allow the them to build off of establish characters.
That's the point. I do think the idea behind Andromeda, the core idea, was a good one. Indeed, from the reveal trailer until the next E3 I was incredibly hyped by the game, then I started to see it wasn't going to be great.
But if you are going to keep on Andromeda, then reconnecting with the Milk Way is out of the question. The whole point of Andromeda is not needing to pick a canon ending, if you're going to do that, might as well stay on the Milk Way. And in the end, that might be the safest choice.
A prequel, of any kind, is out of the question. I'd go with a remake.
This game can't be called Mass Effect 4 since the 4th Mass Effect game already came out.
I'd be like IW making a MW4 despite MW being the 4th MW game.
I'd be like IW making a MW4 despite MW being the 4th MW game.
We won't see it next gen. They are trying to salvage Anthem and DA4 is still basically in the starting stages.
I think a remake presents its own problems, especially with how major characters were connected to real and well known actors.
Personally if I were on the creative team involved, I'd want to remake it/adapt it, in a way actors like doing shakesphere
As a player/Consumer. I want something new, fresh and interesting. I think Andromeda best represents the way that can be achieved
Just give me an alternate reality where Femshep and DickShep both have to work together to stop a new onslaught of reapers and I'll be happy.
Every scenario has its own challenges. But I think these challenges are better faced in the Milk Way, where Mass Effect is actually Mass Effect.
I love Mass Effect. It's the one thing from Bioware that'll always get me to show up. So yeah I'll be there even with playing Andromeda lol.
Start from scratch, use Unreal Engine 4 and build using next generation tech.
Take your time, don't focus on any sort of GaaS model and hire the Mass Effect 1 writer to pen the story.
Take your time, don't focus on any sort of GaaS model and hire the Mass Effect 1 writer to pen the story.
Make it good and I'm on-board.
Plus in a Bioware RPG they'd have to limit the choices you could make in the end since we know how the first contact war with the Turians went. Plus if it's set in that time there wouldn't be many alien races to interact with to my knowledge.
Haha, yeah I'm not a huge fan of prequels either.
Plus in a Bioware RPG they'd have to limit the choices you could make in the end since we know how the first contact war with the Turians went. Plus if it's set in that time there wouldn't be many alien races to interact with to my knowledge.
I don't get it—what are they actually salvaging? It seems like so many things need to be rebuilt from the ground up that I don't see the benefit of doing this before making a new game.
If a relaunch happens, it'll obviously be next generation, so even things like the current character models might not remain. So is it the character and environment designs? Animations? The story that nobody liked?
I would love Anthem: But Good, but I don't see how this works out.
If a relaunch happens, it'll obviously be next generation, so even things like the current character models might not remain. So is it the character and environment designs? Animations? The story that nobody liked?
I would love Anthem: But Good, but I don't see how this works out.
Alright sluts, listen up: I'm an expert on all things Mass Effect (several degrees and two masters, a thousand plus hours on-field experience), so here's the lowdown.
• Destroy ending plus Geth/AI survive, with various amalgamations of choices and whatever additions/changes BioWare feel is relevant. Essentially an end-state that is technically not achievable by anyone in the Trilogy, thus providing a neutral blank canvas for everyone, but draws from the Trilogy's best-case-scenario situations for potential of broader storytelling.
• Reapers are dead as dead. The Illusive Man and Cerberus absolutely obliterated in all forms. Quarians and Geth united on Rannoch. Krogan live and Genophage cured, under the rule of Wrex.
• No synthesis. All ending slides for all endings negated and irrelevant to this canon timeline.
• Relays damaged but under repair.
• Shepard dead as dead.
• Galaxy is in a post-war depression. Each species is balancing the optimism of having conquered the Reapers alongside the stress of what is next. Each species confronted with the reality of the war; collecting and burying their dead that number in billions, evaluating the destruction and rebuilding worlds where possible, aiding refugees and those in crisis despite the war having ended, all the while scrambling for stability and resources. Post war tension and desperation, like a simmering pot, not unlike WW2 -> Cold War.
• Damaged relays make connecting between worlds more difficult than before, despite repairs. Resource scarcity and changes in the political landscape lead to a mandate for looser restrictions on Relay activation. New relays are activated and opened, with some caution, in order for species to quickly find garden worlds to populate and ease the burden of the post war crisis.
• Krogan and Quarian/Geth Unity in the most advantageous position due to their isolated victories. Asari decimated due to destruction and loss of homeworld. Turians forming new alliances. Salarians retreating into secrecy due to conservative attitudes to the war. Humans doing whatever humans do (boring stuff).
• Relay activation allows for exploring new, previously uncharted regions of the galaxy. New planets/systems/etc. Work a story of new discoveries in here.
• System found outside of Relay network. System is home to new species that has advanced to spacefaring technology without the use of any Reaper tech. Theory being a Relay for that system, or planet housing technology, was destroyed early on in some natural galactic cataclysm, and thus fell completely off the Reaper's radar with each cycle (the lore supports this, as the Reapers use the Relay network and Citadel hub to navigate and monitor the galaxy). New species has had the fortune of essentially being able to evolve and develop over millennia outside of Reaper influence and knowledge, giving them a totally unique technological evolutionary path. Reaper extinction cycles have been going on unbeknown to them (maybe they document strange galactic phenomena, but not sure what it is).
• Narrative explores their introduction to the rest of the galaxy, especially given their stability.
• New protagonist. New set of squadmates. Cameo and/or references to previous cast only.
• Level/game design similar to Mass Effect 2/3. Listen I love open explorable zones and feel the future of the series would benefit tremendously from them. I just don't think BioWare necessarily has the chops to do them well. It's not their forte, so I'd rather them pull off something they evidently can do well.
• Lots of planets and locations to visit, even if we're only there briefly. Planet hopping is important.
• Tighter cover shoot/bang/biotic/tech stuff and not the bullet sponge Destiny-lite stuff from Andromeda.
• Andromeda is a solid premise and I actually grew to enjoy it more than I thought once I finally saw it through a month ago, and I do want to see the mysteries resolved. But the lukewarm execution of the lore, premise, galaxy itself, cast, etc dampened the entire experience. Despite the intrigue I'm not actually sure I want to go back, and I don't know how salvageable it is, even if a ~good video game~ is made in that framework. I'm not sure Mass Effect fans by and large will care.
• Ignore people obsessing over Trilogy canon. Everybody had their own experience, their own Shepard, their own timeline, and their own choices and ending. It's obviously logistically impossible to cater to these people and a separate timeline starting a new canon on the bedrock of the trilogy does not negate a players individual, personal experience with the trilogy. The above hypothetical is simply not my Shepard from the trilogy, and if you're careful with the lore then it's nobodies Shepard.
• Absolutely no prequels. They're inherently limited in storytelling and scope and will forever have the trilogy's baggage hanging overhead.
• No remakes. Remaster the trilogy and leave it as that. Move forward.
This is my fan fiction, thank you for reading.
• Destroy ending plus Geth/AI survive, with various amalgamations of choices and whatever additions/changes BioWare feel is relevant. Essentially an end-state that is technically not achievable by anyone in the Trilogy, thus providing a neutral blank canvas for everyone, but draws from the Trilogy's best-case-scenario situations for potential of broader storytelling.
• Reapers are dead as dead. The Illusive Man and Cerberus absolutely obliterated in all forms. Quarians and Geth united on Rannoch. Krogan live and Genophage cured, under the rule of Wrex.
• No synthesis. All ending slides for all endings negated and irrelevant to this canon timeline.
• Relays damaged but under repair.
• Shepard dead as dead.
• Galaxy is in a post-war depression. Each species is balancing the optimism of having conquered the Reapers alongside the stress of what is next. Each species confronted with the reality of the war; collecting and burying their dead that number in billions, evaluating the destruction and rebuilding worlds where possible, aiding refugees and those in crisis despite the war having ended, all the while scrambling for stability and resources. Post war tension and desperation, like a simmering pot, not unlike WW2 -> Cold War.
• Damaged relays make connecting between worlds more difficult than before, despite repairs. Resource scarcity and changes in the political landscape lead to a mandate for looser restrictions on Relay activation. New relays are activated and opened, with some caution, in order for species to quickly find garden worlds to populate and ease the burden of the post war crisis.
• Krogan and Quarian/Geth Unity in the most advantageous position due to their isolated victories. Asari decimated due to destruction and loss of homeworld. Turians forming new alliances. Salarians retreating into secrecy due to conservative attitudes to the war. Humans doing whatever humans do (boring stuff).
• Relay activation allows for exploring new, previously uncharted regions of the galaxy. New planets/systems/etc. Work a story of new discoveries in here.
• System found outside of Relay network. System is home to new species that has advanced to spacefaring technology without the use of any Reaper tech. Theory being a Relay for that system, or planet housing technology, was destroyed early on in some natural galactic cataclysm, and thus fell completely off the Reaper's radar with each cycle (the lore supports this, as the Reapers use the Relay network and Citadel hub to navigate and monitor the galaxy). New species has had the fortune of essentially being able to evolve and develop over millennia outside of Reaper influence and knowledge, giving them a totally unique technological evolutionary path. Reaper extinction cycles have been going on unbeknown to them (maybe they document strange galactic phenomena, but not sure what it is).
• Narrative explores their introduction to the rest of the galaxy, especially given their stability.
• New protagonist. New set of squadmates. Cameo and/or references to previous cast only.
• Level/game design similar to Mass Effect 2/3. Listen I love open explorable zones and feel the future of the series would benefit tremendously from them. I just don't think BioWare necessarily has the chops to do them well. It's not their forte, so I'd rather them pull off something they evidently can do well.
• Lots of planets and locations to visit, even if we're only there briefly. Planet hopping is important.
• Tighter cover shoot/bang/biotic/tech stuff and not the bullet sponge Destiny-lite stuff from Andromeda.
• Andromeda is a solid premise and I actually grew to enjoy it more than I thought once I finally saw it through a month ago, and I do want to see the mysteries resolved. But the lukewarm execution of the lore, premise, galaxy itself, cast, etc dampened the entire experience. Despite the intrigue I'm not actually sure I want to go back, and I don't know how salvageable it is, even if a ~good video game~ is made in that framework. I'm not sure Mass Effect fans by and large will care.
• Ignore people obsessing over Trilogy canon. Everybody had their own experience, their own Shepard, their own timeline, and their own choices and ending. It's obviously logistically impossible to cater to these people and a separate timeline starting a new canon on the bedrock of the trilogy does not negate a players individual, personal experience with the trilogy. The above hypothetical is simply not my Shepard from the trilogy, and if you're careful with the lore then it's nobodies Shepard.
• Absolutely no prequels. They're inherently limited in storytelling and scope and will forever have the trilogy's baggage hanging overhead.
• No remakes. Remaster the trilogy and leave it as that. Move forward.
This is my fan fiction, thank you for reading.