Mass Effect IV - Editorial @ PC Gamer

Couchpotato

Part-Time News-bot
Joined
October 1, 2010
Messages
36,351
Location
Spudlandia
PC Gamer has a new article about what they want in the next Mass Effect.

How do you follow an act like the galaxy's most high-stakes game of three-card monte? Apparently by completely starting over. BioWare has long insisted that Mass Effect 3 marked the definitive end of Commander Shepard's story arc, regardless of whether you picked the green pill, the red pill, or the blue pill. The good news, of course, is that it's created a universe that leaves plenty of room for other stars.The big question is who that star will be. BioWare has only dropped a few hints that yield some clues as to what kind of ride we're in for during the next installment, and thus we'd like to put forward a few of our own ideas about how the next chapter in the Mass Effect saga should unfold. (Also, there are spoilers ahead, particularly if you somehow missed the furor over the ending of Mass Effect 3 last year. For convenience, the upcoming game is called "Mass Effect 4," even though BioWare has stated that this won't be the title.)
More information.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,351
Location
Spudlandia
To sum it up:

1) Should be set in the future. Agree 100%. Just don't think that's the case here. Having nothing to do with "the Shepherd events" basically rules out any future-based sequel.

2) Main character shouldn't be human. Disagree here. I get that folks like to play elves, dragons, goats, etc in games, but in ME it's about the player living in a future Earth surrounded by new, interesting beings. I want them to continue to be interesting and foreign. I don't want to play them.

3) Divergent paths for renegade/paragon. Meh. I always play the good guy, so I could care less if they diverge. I'm sure others would.

4) Main character shouldn't be a soldier. No problem here. While I'd be cool with it, I wouldn't mind being an average Joe either. Just, for Chrissakes, not a Cerberus operative.

5) More interaction with ships. Big yes here.

6) It should stay true to its roots. Subject to interpretation.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
1,753
Location
San Juan Islands, WA
Having nothing to do with "the Shepherd events" basically rules out any future-based sequel.

What makes you think that? It doesn't have to be directly related to the Shepard story arc to take place in the future.

Personally, I really don't want a prequel for the exact reason mentioned in the article. We already know too much about the past events in that universe. A story set in the future would be far more interesting than one from the past imo.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,334
Location
Florida, US
To sum it up:

1) Should be set in the future. Agree 100%. Just don't think that's the case here. Having nothing to do with "the Shepherd events" basically rules out any future-based sequel.

No. If indeed it has nothing to do with the shepard's events, it basically rules out any sequel, prequel or sidequel.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
What makes you think that? It doesn't have to be directly related to the Shepard story arc to take place in the future.

Personally, I really don't want a prequel for the exact reason mentioned in the article. We already know too much about the past events in that universe. A story set in the future would be far more interesting than one from the past imo.

In the actual quote from the ME4 writer, he went out of his way to say it has absolutely nothing to do with any of the "Shepard events". Nothing. Even if Shepard is not mentioned directly, the events that occurred cannot be unwritten. Therefore, if taken literally, logic dictates any sequel can't just ignore that the universe exploded (or at least the relays), the Reaper invasion, etc. And if the events are out of the picture, they likely didn't occur yet, so therefore ME4 is a prequel or sidequel.

And that sucks donkey balls, which may or may not be in ME4.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
1,753
Location
San Juan Islands, WA
I am not big on ME story. Actually, I am not big on video games stories in general.

But wasnt Sheppard's arc set in a galaxy? Wasnt it a galaxy that "exploded" in the end?

It seems to me that Sheppard is a galactic saviour, not a universal saviour. Maybe a lead to explore for Bioware so that they upgrade on their sensational character to play.

If so, it might be that the universe did not explode. Only one galaxy. The ME universe is a big one, bigger than a galaxy or even a collection of galaxies.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
In the actual quote from the ME4 writer, he went out of his way to say it has absolutely nothing to do with any of the "Shepard events". Nothing. Even if Shepard is not mentioned directly, the events that occurred cannot be unwritten. Therefore, if taken literally, logic dictates any sequel can't just ignore that the universe exploded (or at least the relays), the Reaper invasion, etc. And if the events are out of the picture, they likely didn't occur yet, so therefore ME4 is a prequel or sidequel.

I just don't agree with that. It can still be a sequel without having anything to do with the Shepard events. I don't see how "Shepard events" means things like the Reapers can't even be mentioned. I think he means that there's just not going to be any direct connection to those same characters. The biggest issue imo is choosing which of the 3 endings of ME3 is going to be canon.

I think a sidequel would be much less likely, as that would be even harder to separate from the events of the ME1-3.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,334
Location
Florida, US
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,996
Location
Germany

…which is exactly why it isn't going to happen. Listen, I want to believe it will be a sequel, but it just won't be for all the reasons mentioned. BioWare took the easy way out here, I'm almost certain of it. They wrote themselves into a corner and their only choice is to do pre-ME123 events, or go so far into the future that none of the stuff that happened matters. And if that's case, it'd basically be a whole different game.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2011
Messages
1,753
Location
San Juan Islands, WA
…which is exactly why it isn't going to happen. Listen, I want to believe it will be a sequel, but it just won't be for all the reasons mentioned. BioWare took the easy way out here, I'm almost certain of it. They wrote themselves into a corner and their only choice is to do pre-ME123 events, or go so far into the future that none of the stuff that happened matters. And if that's case, it'd basically be a whole different game.

Eh? Bioware has never had a problem with choosing players decisions for them or retconning certain events as they see fit. I'm not sure why you think this must be different.

They'll go with whatever they think is going to sell them the most copies.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,334
Location
Florida, US
while I also would be tempted to make a list like this and tick off my favorite details (more spacey space stuff plz!), all this comes off as incredibly superficial. retconning can be annoying and being stuck as a predefined character isn't the coolest conceibable option but what really matters is fucking coherency. my single wish for biopoop's new trilogy? pick a single, insightful writer, and stick the fuck with them. don't try to imagine you think you can do better than them in the sequels. pick a (meaningful) story and stick with it. you write the videogame equivalents of Clue: The Movie. that means the plot cannot just be scissored up between acts at your whim because you imagine it would be more popular if shepard could do hand to hand combat with a reaper.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
97
Back
Top Bottom