It doesn't have to be called Mass Effect at all. Give it a new name.blackacewide affliction
This topic is locked from further discussion.
:o that might be a bit of a huge undertaking if you include air vehicles!Eh, perhaps I'm just spoiled by Bungie dev'ed Halo Reach that included all that and it's just a FPS. :o C'mon Bio, you can do it. :P[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="SecretPolice"]That's what I'm talinbout - also included should be well done, player controlled, surface, air and space vehicles. :D
SecretPolice
Actual space exploration and combat, ala Frontier: Elite or Evochron Mercenary, would be beyond epic! We could build our own ship and get parts for it...oh boy!!!
Unfortunatly, it wont happen :P
Eh, perhaps I'm just spoiled by Bungie dev'ed Halo Reach that included all that and it's just a FPS. :o C'mon Bio, you can do it. :P[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]
[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] :o that might be a bit of a huge undertaking if you include air vehicles!PAL360
Actual space exploration and combat, ala Frontier: Elite or Evochron Mercenary, would be beyond epic! We could build our own ship and get parts for it...oh boy!!!
Unfortunatly, it wont happen :P
But I want it all. :cry:Tis the art of negotiation, ask for way more than what you'l actually settle for. :P
Eh, perhaps I'm just spoiled by Bungie dev'ed Halo Reach that included all that and it's just a FPS. :o C'mon Bio, you can do it. :P[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]
[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] :o that might be a bit of a huge undertaking if you include air vehicles!PAL360
Actual space exploration and combat, ala Frontier: Elite or Evochron Mercenary, would be beyond epic! We could build our own ship and get parts for it...oh boy!!!
Unfortunatly, it wont happen :P
i'd literally crap my pants if it had ship to ship combat.[QUOTE="drinkerofjuice"]Whatever the story may be, I want it to be years before the Commander Shep saga. They have near endless possibilities with the universe to the extent where the trilogy can be easily dwarfed.blue_hazy_basicI'd be excited by either. There are so many rich opportunities in the pre-shep universe to set a story, but at the same time the shattered pieces of whats left after 3 is so intriguing .... They really can only place a prequel between the 26 year gap of the first contact wars and the beginning of Mass Effect. The reason for this is mostly marketing, not having any humans in which people can identify with in the game would be grievous. I'd be all for a game in the universe with no Humans, but they just wouldn't do that.Â
It would have to be an even shorter time scale because the first contact war setting would be extremely boring. It would just be humans vs everything else.
[QUOTE="PAL360"][QUOTE="SecretPolice"]Eh, perhaps I'm just spoiled by Bungie dev'ed Halo Reach that included all that and it's just a FPS. :o C'mon Bio, you can do it. :P
blue_hazy_basic
Actual space exploration and combat, ala Frontier: Elite or Evochron Mercenary, would be beyond epic! We could build our own ship and get parts for it...oh boy!!!
Unfortunatly, it wont happen :P
i'd literally crap my pants if it had ship to ship combat. And we would have two conclusions to that.. A) SWTOR in which people were b!tching how lame and linear the space combat was, when it was suppose to be a mini game.. B) Spore a game that promised everything.. And it did do that, at the depth of a teaspoon the entire way.. Â
But I want it all. :cry:
Tis the art of negotiation, ask for way more than what you'l actually settle for. :P
SecretPolice
i'd literally crap my pants if it had ship to ship combat.
blue_hazy_basic
It would be soo good!
To be honest, when Mass Effect 1 was announced with a huge explorable world, this and that, i thought we would have that kind of real time freedom! They failed at that, but thankfully surpassed the hype in everything else!
i'd literally crap my pants if it had GOOD* ship to ship combat.[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="PAL360"]
Actual space exploration and combat, ala Frontier: Elite or Evochron Mercenary, would be beyond epic! We could build our own ship and get parts for it...oh boy!!!
Unfortunatly, it wont happen :P
sSubZerOo
 And we would have two conclusions to that.. A) SWTOR in which people were b!tching how lame and linear the space combat was, when it was suppose to be a mini game.. B) Spore a game that promised everything.. And it did do that, at the depth of a teaspoon the entire way.. Â
Fixed* :P Spore was my biggest disappointment this gen, u made me sad ... And I realise that adding space combat to an RPG like ME would be an improbable use of Bioware's resources, but a man can dream dammit! A man can dream![QUOTE="SecretPolice"]
But I want it all. :cry:
Tis the art of negotiation, ask for way more than what you'l actually settle for. :P
PAL360
i'd literally crap my pants if it had ship to ship combat.
blue_hazy_basic
It would be soo good!
To be honest, when Mass Effect 1 was announced with a huge explorable world, this and that, i thought we would have that kind of real time freedom! They failed at that, but thankfully surpassed the hype in everything else!
Someone here got it early and I remember talking to them about the worlds, thinking we could explore them all a bit like KOTOR and being extremely disappointed in how they turned out. Loved ME1 to pieces though!To be honest, you can create any game genre from the Mass Effect Universe, an MMO, an FPS, Open World, Card games, RTS, Even racer lol. Seriously the Mass Effect Universe is that rich enough to house that much because its an entire universe in its own right. The thing that could help Bioware is if they employ alot more creative minds that can help them create unique game genres in the Mass Effect Universe worth caring about
It would be a new game though, just set in the same universe. I love the idea of having a game with a rich background and lore, like the elder scrolls.I think it is time for this industry to start hiring new writers, no one can make a new game anymore? I mean how many more sequels are we going to see how these games. Its getting ridiculous.
xscrapzx
Yeah...ME1 is pretty much overrated by the fanbase. Nevermind Pinnacle Station is terrible. Pretending to be an action game but featuring hit or miss dice rolls is a frusterating no no. ME1 has by far the worst character development in the series, so bad that they had more development in between ME1 and ME2 than in ME1 itself. Wrex is the only character in ME1 to get real character development. Tali gets abssolutely no development at all. Hell, I forgot she was on the ship. ME1's plot was also pretty contrived, more so than ME3. Its quite funny how the idiot fanbase accuses ME3 of reliance on contrivance when ME1 is way worse. With Vigil actually being a Deus Ex Machina played staright. ME3 is actually strongest of the series...it has both a focused plotline than ME2 lacked, while having major character development that ME1 lacked. its that fans are too stupid to realize this while complaining about the already fixed ending they don't get.I cannot comprehend how anyone can say ME1 is better than ME2. And after I saw people defending ME1's DLC, I just gave up any effort to.Â
padaporra
[QUOTE="padaporra"]Yeah...ME1 is pretty much overrated by the fanbase. Nevermind Pinnacle Station is terrible. Pretending to be an action game but featuring hit or miss dice rolls is a frusterating no no. ME1 has by far the worst character development in the series, so bad that they had more development in between ME1 and ME2 than in ME1 itself. Wrex is the only character in ME1 to get real character development. Tali gets abssolutely no development at all. Hell, I forgot she was on the ship. ME1's plot was also pretty contrived, more so than ME3. Its quite funny how the idiot fanbase accuses ME3 of reliance on contrivance when ME1 is way worse. With Vigil actually being a Deus Ex Machina played staright. ME3 is actually strongest of the series...it has both a focused plotline than ME2 lacked, while having major character development that ME1 lacked. its that fans are too stupid to realize this while complaining about the already fixed ending they don't get. My brian joost gat damiged.I cannot comprehend how anyone can say ME1 is better than ME2. And after I saw people defending ME1's DLC, I just gave up any effort to.Â
texasgoldrush
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="padaporra"]Yeah...ME1 is pretty much overrated by the fanbase. Nevermind Pinnacle Station is terrible. Pretending to be an action game but featuring hit or miss dice rolls is a frusterating no no. ME1 has by far the worst character development in the series, so bad that they had more development in between ME1 and ME2 than in ME1 itself. Wrex is the only character in ME1 to get real character development. Tali gets abssolutely no development at all. Hell, I forgot she was on the ship. ME1's plot was also pretty contrived, more so than ME3. Its quite funny how the idiot fanbase accuses ME3 of reliance on contrivance when ME1 is way worse. With Vigil actually being a Deus Ex Machina played staright. ME3 is actually strongest of the series...it has both a focused plotline than ME2 lacked, while having major character development that ME1 lacked. its that fans are too stupid to realize this while complaining about the already fixed ending they don't get. My brian joost gat damiged. Please....sorry, ME1 isn't as good as you remember. Hell, Joker only gets one conversation tree and absolutely NO development in ME1...look at the development he gets in ME2 and ME3. Or Tali's entrance to the series also being a Deus Ex Machina to get evidence on Saren.... Sorry, but fans have nostalgia glasses on.I cannot comprehend how anyone can say ME1 is better than ME2. And after I saw people defending ME1's DLC, I just gave up any effort to.Â
blue_hazy_basic
[QUOTE="blackace"]It doesn't have to be called Mass Effect at all. Give it a new name.texasgoldrushMass Shift would work. What about a Thorian based game called Moss Effect? :P
Halo was their inspiration so perhaps an umm, ODST of sorts. :o It wouldn't surprise me :P[QUOTE="AmnesiaHaze"]
if they wanted to make a ME4 they should have chosen a less apocalyptic ending in ME3
SecretPolice
[QUOTE="padaporra"]
I cannot comprehend how anyone can say ME1 is better than ME2. And after I saw people defending ME1's DLC, I just gave up any effort to.
PAL360
I loved both, but overall i prefer ME1.
ME1 - better story, better soundtrack (imo), better RPG elements and better exploration (loved exploring uncharted worlds with mako).
ME2 - better graphics, better gameplay and loved some characters.
This ^ right here. This says it all.
I'm glad i'm not the only person who enjoyed the mako exploration sequences.Â
So basically it's new game/storyline in the Mass Effect universe
EPaul
Maybe it's a reboot with a Hipster!Shepard.
[QUOTE="PAL360"]
[QUOTE="padaporra"]
I cannot comprehend how anyone can say ME1 is better than ME2. And after I saw people defending ME1's DLC, I just gave up any effort to.
ryangcnx-2
I loved both, but overall i prefer ME1.
ME1 - better story, better soundtrack (imo), better RPG elements and better exploration (loved exploring uncharted worlds with mako).
ME2 - better graphics, better gameplay and loved some characters.
This ^ right here. This says it all.
I'm glad i'm not the only person who enjoyed the mako exploration sequences.
I'm sure we are not alone on this, buddy. Exploration solutions in ME2 and 3 were terrible!
The universe is not destroyed because of the events in ME3. The only difference is no mass relays, a lot more destroyed cities, and no geth. The next story would just not allow jumping around the galaxy like the other ones because of the mass relays.CanYouDigltActually in the extended cut they end up putting the relays back together, which is really lame. Like they wanted that major point in the end, that galactic interconnection is dismantled. Then when everyone rightfully thought it was stupid and poorly handled, they said "na j/k everyone knows how they work and it will be cake to reassemble."
I figured after the dreadful original ending a cool pseudo sequel would be trying to keep the stranded aliens from killing eachother on earth, or maybe a game where you explore the solar system for a way to fix the relay, and only then would they reconnect with the galaxy. But na they pretty much ruined the complexity of any story taking place right after ME3 by putting everything back together in the end.
And no, I don't care about spoilers, it's a ME4 thread and it's been a year.
i can kind of see where he is coming from, but i don't think the WWI and II analogy works. there weren't really any soldiers in WWI that had the impact that shepard did in the ME trilogy. i mean, shepard stops the universe from being destroyed at least 3 times in the main games, probably more in the DLC, and then some of the ME3 ending options would alter everything about the universe. anything set after that time frame would need to do more than gloss over what he/she did.
as for what to do with the series, i think it needs a new technology. the big conceit of the universe, that not only made the fiction possible but also drew me in initially, was the mass effect and all it's potential uses. another mass effect-scale technology would freshen things up again.
that said, i'm wary of bioware management after they caved in to fanboys in ME3. i might wait to see how they handle the inevitable next controversy they run into before i bite on another bioware game.
No, they did not cave in to fanboys, except for a couple things. In fact, when many wanted the ending CHANGED, they said no. Also take into account that the writers said that they did not want fans to see the ending as apocolyptic and thats not what they were trying to portray, so the writers also had an effect. They did what CD Projeckt did with The Witcher 2, expand and flesh out the sudden and rushed ending, while giving an epilogue slide show based on your choices. In fact, I wouldn't doubt that Bioware looked at CD Projeckts fix for TW2 when making their fix for ME3.i can kind of see where he is coming from, but i don't think the WWI and II analogy works. there weren't really any soldiers in WWI that had the impact that shepard did in the ME trilogy. i mean, shepard stops the universe from being destroyed at least 3 times in the main games, probably more in the DLC, and then some of the ME3 ending options would alter everything about the universe. anything set after that time frame would need to do more than gloss over what he/she did.
as for what to do with the series, i think it needs a new technology. the big conceit of the universe, that not only made the fiction possible but also drew me in initially, was the mass effect and all it's potential uses. another mass effect-scale technology would freshen things up again.
that said, i'm wary of bioware management after they caved in to fanboys in ME3. i might wait to see how they handle the inevitable next controversy they run into before i bite on another bioware game.
LoG-Sacrament
[QUOTE="ryangcnx-2"]
[QUOTE="PAL360"]
I loved both, but overall i prefer ME1.
ME1 - better story, better soundtrack (imo), better RPG elements and better exploration (loved exploring uncharted worlds with mako).
ME2 - better graphics, better gameplay and loved some characters.
PAL360
This ^ right here. This says it all.
I'm glad i'm not the only person who enjoyed the mako exploration sequences.
I'm sure we are not alone on this, buddy. Exploration solutions in ME2 and 3 were terrible!
However, the series and the narrative doesn't really allow for too much exploration. The mako exploration sequences are a bore, plain and simple, with dead lifeless planets (except for their skylines), with the same copy paste buildings. Bioware doesn't really do RPGs where you explore, thats not their MO.[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]No, they did not cave in to fanboys, except for a couple things. In fact, when many wanted the ending CHANGED, they said no. Also take into account that the writers said that they did not want fans to see the ending as apocolyptic and thats not what they were trying to portray, so the writers also had an effect. They did what CD Projeckt did with The Witcher 2, expand and flesh out the sudden and rushed ending, while giving an epilogue slide show based on your choices. In fact, I wouldn't doubt that Bioware looked at CD Projeckts fix for TW2 when making their fix for ME3. they felt they needed to explain the ending to more people and they did so by altering the game. i wouldn't have a problem if they had a discussion such as "this is how we interpret the ending," but i don't like the idea of going into the ending and adding more cut-scenes to appease consumers. no matter what the end result in the game is, it makes it feel cheap.i can kind of see where he is coming from, but i don't think the WWI and II analogy works. there weren't really any soldiers in WWI that had the impact that shepard did in the ME trilogy. i mean, shepard stops the universe from being destroyed at least 3 times in the main games, probably more in the DLC, and then some of the ME3 ending options would alter everything about the universe. anything set after that time frame would need to do more than gloss over what he/she did.
as for what to do with the series, i think it needs a new technology. the big conceit of the universe, that not only made the fiction possible but also drew me in initially, was the mass effect and all it's potential uses. another mass effect-scale technology would freshen things up again.
that said, i'm wary of bioware management after they caved in to fanboys in ME3. i might wait to see how they handle the inevitable next controversy they run into before i bite on another bioware game.
texasgoldrush
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]Except for one thing (the relays, which they restored back to their original idea for them), they altered nothing. No, they did not cave in to fanboys, except for a couple things. In fact, when many wanted the ending CHANGED, they said no. Also take into account that the writers said that they did not want fans to see the ending as apocolyptic and thats not what they were trying to portray, so the writers also had an effect. They did what CD Projeckt did with The Witcher 2, expand and flesh out the sudden and rushed ending, while giving an epilogue slide show based on your choices. In fact, I wouldn't doubt that Bioware looked at CD Projeckts fix for TW2 when making their fix for ME3. they felt they needed to explain the ending to more people and they did so by altering the game. i wouldn't have a problem if they had a discussion such as "this is how we interpret the ending," but i don't like the idea of going into the ending and adding more cut-scenes to appease consumers. no matter what the end result in the game is, it makes it feel cheap. However, the writers felt that they also did not communicate the ending well and did not want fans to interpit it in ways that had no intention for fans to interpet. And really, they didn't appease everyone, many wanted a happy ending...they didn't get it. And really, the memorial wall sequence was a thematic keystone for ME3. They made a compromise here. And it was fair. And Bioware absolutely needed to flesh out the Catalyst. THIS had to be done. No ifs ands or buts.i can kind of see where he is coming from, but i don't think the WWI and II analogy works. there weren't really any soldiers in WWI that had the impact that shepard did in the ME trilogy. i mean, shepard stops the universe from being destroyed at least 3 times in the main games, probably more in the DLC, and then some of the ME3 ending options would alter everything about the universe. anything set after that time frame would need to do more than gloss over what he/she did.
as for what to do with the series, i think it needs a new technology. the big conceit of the universe, that not only made the fiction possible but also drew me in initially, was the mass effect and all it's potential uses. another mass effect-scale technology would freshen things up again.
that said, i'm wary of bioware management after they caved in to fanboys in ME3. i might wait to see how they handle the inevitable next controversy they run into before i bite on another bioware game.
LoG-Sacrament
here is casey hudson hyping the ending as "amazing" and "very definitive." here he comes off as very proud of it as well.
if they really wanted to stick with their guns, they would have left it as it was. some people would have liked it and some wouldn't have, but that would have been fine. some people like the new ending and that's fine too. but honestly, i don't like the idea of going back and changing (or "expanding") a major part of the game because fans complained. and let's say for second that bioware did make changes just to tell off a few people. that's cutting off the nose to spite the face.
i'm actually one of gamers that didn't like the game (not for the ending, but it's a long story. ask if you care). however, i wouldn't want bioware to go back and start throwing stuff in until i shut up. it's because i don't want to order a game. i want to try one. gaming is much more exciting when i could potentially play something that's so good i never knew i wanted it.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment