I just completed my sixth play through of Mass Effect and it is time for speculation on the plot for the sequel. I figure I'll throw my ideas out there now and when it comes we'll see how fine tuned my powers of deduction are. For those who do not feel they've completed their Mass Effect experience, be aware there are going to be many spoilers dropped throughout this blog so read on at your own peril.

Let's start with the obvious, in the downloaded content they pretty much spell out the Batarians will be playing an integral part in the sequel. If you refused to let Balak go, he goes on a tangent about the upcoming Batarian revolution. Even devoid of this blatant spell out, the Batarians were constantly referenced but didn't play a part in this story, even though in they are involved in half the background choices. It is time they started playing a larger part in the immediate game plot. Plus, the intimidation factor of the Geth has dimmed by now. They need a new race to instill fear, anger...

Obviously the Reapers are the main threat, but the Batarians are going to be the thorn our heros side while he tries to make advances against them, much like Saren and the Geth were in the first. What I expect is some kind of technological advance or discovery which may lead to an advantage against the reapers will be discovered, and right as things are starting to look good for humanity, the Batarians will attack. Whether you chose to spare the council by sacrifices human lives or let the council die off, the military forces at your command were severely weekend against the battle against Soveriegn and the Geth. It would be the ideal time to strike. The Geth if you didn't deal with the assembling force side quest, will probably hit humanity too.

However, attaining this new tech will not be easy. My guess is the Shadow Broker will be in on the whole thing. He'll have info that could make or break you. Perhaps the research started on Virmire on indoctrination yielded results he procured and depending on if you helped them or not with the Cerberus intel will determine their willingness to work with you or the Batarians Maybe the Prothean ruin on Feros will turn up something as well if you saved it. Either way something is going to turn up for the better and either the Batarians are going to take it or they will have it in the first place depending on your choices. They will attack throwing Citadel Space in Chaos again at its weakest time.

For those of you who saw the trailer where Noveria was being attacked and Shepard turned away before ME came out, I believe that wasn't just some random trailer to show choice. I think it will happen in ME2. That will be one of the locations the Batarians attack and you will be forced to either save them or turn to another place, perhaps to take the fight to the Batarians and gather the needed technology.

One major thorn I can see is the fruits of your kindness or cruelty. The Asari on Feros I am positive is still under the influences of indoctrination on some level. That evil grimace she gives after passing the knowledge to you proved to me she still was effected on some level. Perhaps not unlike Benezia, she mustered a brief bought of will. She will be, in essence, one of the new heralds for the Reapers, if you spared her. Meanwhile the Rachni I can see as a valuable allies coming to save the day in a clinch moment if you spared them, to repay their dept. Crime syndicates and organizations like Binery Helix, Synthetics... will be valuable allies or enemies maybe even lend to development.

Certain characters cannot have key roles in the plot, though, because of the possibility of their death. At best they will have a shaky role like in KOTOR2 when Carth is either the general there or some other cookie cutter guy to fill the role. B/c of the council choice, if alien planets or alien involvement is in the game, it has to be in a submissive role. Humans are playing the major part in this next tale (not that they weren't in the first) But I'm starting to over generalize and just kind preach to the possibilities depending on your choices. Back to my predications.

In addition to this new discovery and the Batarian revolt, there will be a sighting of Reapers, later in the game. At first it will be remnants of previously indoctrinated slaves taken into custody by the reapers in dark space. We'll see Protheans and other races bread into indoctrination by the Reapers. But later, you'll see a Reaper itself amidst the conflict with the Batarians. It will attempt to exert control over the Batarians, pioneering humanities evil, while informing the other Reapers of the Sovereigns fate and the state of the galaxy. You will be forced to either convert and join the Batarians, or crush them into submission forcing them to aid you against the larger threat.

Also, Soveriegn said that each Reaper is unique and perfect in its own way. I expect that the Reapers are all powerful, but not the same. They may not all be like Soveriegn. Anything from the design to the size, to the capabilities are going to vary. We are going to see a lot of different kinds of Reapers.

A lot more will be revealed about the Reapers origin as well. In fact, this new tech discovery or whatever, is probably this insight thus allowing the council races to develop weapons against them and further fight them and/or indoctrination. You'll probably get to board a reaper and see the inner workings. Who build the reapers will prob be revealed as well. They probably evolved and advanced themselves like the Geth did. I think the Keepers were in fact the first race indoctrinated and the makers of the Reapers. Considering the start of Reaper evolution would be the base technology developed by their builders, this would make the Keepers the ideal keepers (pun intended) of the Citadel. Even if the Reapers built the mass relays and the Citadel, the Keepers would already have a basic knowledge and skill of the tech. Not to mention there would always have to be this race to maintain the Citadel for the Reapers plan to work so the first race indoctrinated would be a logical choice and the first race is either the their makers or another race that existed at the time, which that race most likely wouldn't be as equipped to handle the job. Plus, machine or not, I got the distinct impression the Reapers are a vindictive race and I wouldn't put it past them to punish their makers by making them their eternal slaves.

Considering there will be a ME3, we cannot completely defeat them yet and there always has to be a looming threat at the end of a chapter, so I think at the end of this game, we will know who they are, where they came from, where their equivalent to a home work is... The final fight in ME2 will likely be an initial attack wave of reapers sent to destroy us and we will repel the attack with our new weapon.

Most of the game will be spent in the Terminus systems. They too have been talked about a lot without delving very much into them. In addition to the Batarians, we will see and be exposed to other non-council races. We will have to win them over too. Although I think most of that will be sub-quests and not main plot. Through force or peace Citadel space and the Terminus systems will be allied for the final fight in the end.

Ever since the release of Halo 3, I've seen a swarm of comments and criticism aimed towards Halo 3. Much of the time it even seeps into topics that have nothing to do with the game. People whining about how it isn't that revolutionary, it was simply in the right place at the right time, the graphics aren't that good, the game mechanics are the same as any other shooter, they borrowed ideas from other games... Each time I hear these I can't help but shake my head at the utter ignorance of people desperately trying to find a way to explain something they don't understand. Here is one simple fact: if it wasn't that good, it wouldn't sell so many copies.

Now, I know those words quickly draw those stereotypical arguments I mentioned before to mind, but I have a few points to consider. Let's break them down by each of the major points.

1. It was in the right place at the right time.

For the most part this is true. At the time of the first Halo release Xbox players were starving for a good shooter. Goldeneye showed that console FPS could be done well, and got people really excited about the concept. However, here is the critical flaw in this argument. No matter how well timed a game can be, if the game does not deliver a quality product, it won't succeed. Be honest. If they released some garbage game like Perfect Dark Zero (no offense to the fans of this game), would it have been gobbled up and made into a billion dollar franchise like Halo was? Halo succeeded because it offered something to the gaming community no other game did, and it was not the release date.

2. The graphics aren't that good.

To this I ask one question, since when have we as gamers measured the quality of a game by graphics alone? Sure they are important, but are we really going to call a game a failure because it has a few less polygons? When I look on the graphics, I'm more than satisfied, and if they were any better, I'd suspect those multiplayer games we cherish so much wouldn't fun quite as smooth. The graphics may not be the best the console can offer, but they are smooth, crisp and get the job done. I don't need to see a bead of sweat rolling down the inside of a Spartans thigh to get into a game. I just need it to look good enough to absorb myself in the experience.

3. The game isn't that revolutionary.

Since when was it supposed to be? Even in the advertisements all they say is "New weapons, new maps." It was never meant to be a complete overhaul, so why are you using this as an argument? Do you have so few elements of contention that you have to put words in other people mouths to have the illusion of winning an argument? It wasn't meant to be new or different, just Halo in HD with a few new toys.

4. They borrowed others ideas.

Granted, map editors and game film are REALLY common to any strategy or RPG gamer, but for FPS, that is pretty new. Yes, people can use their capture cards and put together some cool clips and/or movies, but that required extra hardware and a little work. Now, it is as simple as an all rockets game. Is it totally new? No. Is it cool and more accessible than your average console FPS gamer is used to yes. It is not the end all be all of the game, just a small new toy for people to play with.

Basically, my point is don't say a game doesn't deserve the hype or the sales simply because you don't enjoy it or understand why others do. It was hyped because millions of people had, played and still play Halo 2, and Halo 3 delivered exactly what it promised: new weapons, maps and a slightly more modern look for a game many gamers already held dear. Games do well on more than just release dates and chance. They earn a following because they are good, plain and simple. Each fan has their own reason for liking it, just like you have your reasons for not, so relax. Enjoy the games you consider to be better and stop stressing out about a game that has brought gaming joy to millions of people, not to mention expanded the gaming market so companies can afford to bring more games to our table in general. Take care all, have fun and game on!