SPOILER CONTENT FROM ORIGINAL GAMES! What do you want from the next Mass Effect game?

[DaveMcDamage]

Hi all,

 

The legendary edition has renewed my obsession with Mass Effect all over again, so much so that I am finally going to get ME: Andromeda just to get my space fix. No doubt you have all heard about the news of the next game from teasers to posters, as well as the odd bit of info from the people behind the project. 

 

So what are some of the things you'd love to see in the next Mass Effect game?

 

Stroy: This is where it has me a bit nervous to be honest. I worry that wanting to continue the story from some of the original characters is going to make what we did in the trilogy (and possibly Andromeda) a waste of time if they decide to just go all canon on it. The indoctrination theory makes sort of sense, as Shepard could have been getting indoctrinated ever since the first prothean becon, right up to those dream type things he was having in the third game, as well as how he could be controlled by the Illusive Man. Which in turn could actually make the infamous endings of ME3 actually come across as genius. Stll though, very worried about this. 

 

Game engine: News is being said that the devs want to ditch the Frostbite engine and go back to Unreal. I know nothing of engines, other than devs seem to like working on Unreal engines but it costs them to use it. Splash the cash EA for cripes sake. 

 

Weapons: Whilst I love customization, I think when it comes to weapons it wrecks finding new ones. No Mass Effect game ever got the ammo right because be it fire, warp or electric, it still lets one type wreck through enemies using just one type. 

 

Vehicles. I hope we go back to more linear map designs that contain very well structured designs as opposed to empty open worlds. But I would love a space craft to get in some serious space battles. I think the dream would be Mass Effect cross with No Mans Sky lol. 

 

Character creation: For cripes sake but in some awesome creation tool. Also add in the feature that was used in Dragon Age Inquisition, whereby if your character from previous games arrives in the story, let us recreate them rather than having the devs canon model.

 

A lot of riding on this though. Despite how we hate the things EA has done to multiple dev houses, they have give BIoWare all the time in the world to develop games and new IP's and its been BIoWare that has gone and wrecked it. So whilst I want this franchise to continue, I'm also very cagey at what BIoWare will attempt. Heard Dragon Age 4 is set for 2023 and the next Mass Effect will be 2025. So its doubful we will get another trilogy that late into the PS5's life cycle, or maybe it could be one ginormous game they plan to make. 

 

What do you guys want?

[snakebit10]

My main thing I am curious is how they will continue the story. Especially if Shepherd somehow returns. shepherd was rebuilt once, can it be done again? I guess it depends on the ending that was chosen. I have only seen one ending. I believe I chose the same ending on PS3 and the remastered trilogy.

[DaveMcDamage]

57 minutes ago, snakebit10 said:

My main thing I am curious is how they will continue the story. Especially if Shepherd somehow returns. shepherd was rebuilt once, can it be done again? I guess it depends on the ending that was chosen. I have only seen one ending. I believe I chose the same ending on PS3 and the remastered trilogy.

Bringing a Shepard back wouldn't be the problem. They already have the clone data to build him. But then his memories would be set just at the first collector attack.

 

Personally I couldn't take another game with that Mark Meer doing the voice over. His range is set to sleep mode and has to be the most luckiest bastard in voice acting to have made it past the first game. 

 

But going back to the indoctrination theory. It wouldn't matter what ending happened as that could just be what the Reapers/Catalyst wanted him to see. The dead reapers in the teaser trailer could perhaps be based on if as the the player chose the ending they wanted, Shepard some how snaps out of it  it and chooses the destroy ending. But then he still wouldn't be alive over 600 years into the future when the teaser is set. So Shepard is either dead and gone, or he/she has been cloned again.

[Cleggworth]

12 minutes ago, DaveMcDamage said:

Bringing a Shepard back wouldn't be the problem. They already have the clone data to build him. But then his memories would be set just at the first collector attack.

 

Synthesis is made the canon ending, pre ME2 Shepard returns and is now stuck in a nightmare where machines are no longer the enemy. He's the villain and the game is just one long intervention

[snakebit10]

16 minutes ago, DaveMcDamage said:

Bringing a Shepard back wouldn't be the problem. They already have the clone data to build him. But then his memories would be set just at the first collector attack.

 

Personally I couldn't take another game with that Mark Meer doing the voice over. His range is set to sleep mode and has to be the most luckiest bastard in voice acting to have made it past the first game. 

 

But going back to the indoctrination theory. It wouldn't matter what ending happened as that could just be what the Reapers/Catalyst wanted him to see. The dead reapers in the teaser trailer could perhaps be based on if as the the player chose the ending they wanted, Shepard some how snaps out of it  it and chooses the destroy ending. But then he still wouldn't be alive over 600 years into the future when the teaser is set. So Shepard is either dead and gone, or he/she has been cloned again.

 

I honestly only used a male shepherd one time and that was my insanity run in Mass Effect 2 on PS3. Since it is 600 years in the future it would have to be a new protagonist unless they clone him/her. I used the destruction ending. I feel that is what the whole trilogy was leading you to do and that is what I chose.

[Silocia]

49 minutes ago, DaveMcDamage said:

Personally I couldn't take another game with that Mark Meer doing the voice over. His range is set to sleep mode and has to be the most luckiest bastard in voice acting to have made it past the first game. 

 

I always chose the female, even back on the originals simple because the voice acting is better.

 

My only worry is that they will play it safe, they blame Andromeda but it isnt the story that was bad it was the game. Having the Geth in the image has me worried, we've spent a whole trilogy exploring them and ultimately showing that theyre not the bad guys, so if they try and make them the enemies again, I'm out.

[DaveMcDamage]

12 hours ago, Silocia said:

I always chose the female, even back on the originals simple because the voice acting is better.

 

My only worry is that they will play it safe, they blame Andromeda but it isnt the story that was bad it was the game. Having the Geth in the image has me worried, we've spent a whole trilogy exploring them and ultimately showing that theyre not the bad guys, so if they try and make them the enemies again, I'm out.

Its either gonna be a complete mess or what gets BioWare back to its old roots of having great stories. 

 

I have a feeling this Geth teaser is simply a metaphor for indoctrination. But then again, the catalyst always said history repeated itself and no matter how much peace came between organics and synthetics, the outcome was that organics were always a problem that the synthetics always tried to rectify. Its why in our real life situation AI is a huge problem. Once it starts looking at how we choose destroy over embracing to reach a higher level of existence, it would have no choice but to wipe us out. 

[DaveMcDamage]

On 11/16/2021 at 5:24 PM, snakebit10 said:

 

I honestly only used a male shepherd one time and that was my insanity run in Mass Effect 2 on PS3. Since it is 600 years in the future it would have to be a new protagonist unless they clone him/her. I used the destruction ending. I feel that is what the whole trilogy was leading you to do and that is what I chose.

My only problem with the destruction ending is that the catalyst said that whilst technology would be rebuilt and history will eventually repeat itself, EDI was part of the Normandy systems integration. Take EDI out and you can possibly take the Normandy out. And even without that, the Normandy is still high-tech which would have been destroyed due to its other VI interfaces etc. 

 

This is why I think devs may possibly go with the indoctrination ending. As it stands, what made the ME3 endings half arsed, wasn't so much the writing, but the inconsistences during the sequences. The destroy endings take out the relays, okay. So lets say the Normandy uses FLT to get away from the blast, it would still be in the sol system and there is no other Earth like planet in the sol system for them to even crash land on. I never had issue with the colours or outcome choices of the endings, just the inconsistences. But even if BioWare never intended it, everything from that final Harbinger blast points to indoctrination. 

 

Even going back to the first game. Seran would have destroyed the prothean beacon once he got what he wanted if it was just conduit info he wanted, as he wouldn't want anyone else to get it. So that is why I think beacon itself could have been an indoctrination tool itself. The reaper that landed on Eden Prime could easily have tweaked it to do so, as again it would have just destroyed it once it got what it wanted from it. 

 

Again though. I think its just bad writing that led to all that, or possibly they had no idea it was going to as successful as it was and eventually burnt out. 

 

I think Andromeda never stood a chance even if it didn't have the problems it had. The reapers were the strongest opponent anyone could face, forget world enders, they were galaxy restarts. Its hard to top that. So for Andromeda to go for a strong enemy right from the start was a bit of a mistake for me. They could have found a planet, had you doing exploring and settlement stuff and then introduced an enemy. The dark matter thing is probably the only thing stronger than reapers and leviathans, and its probably the origin of everything, so perhaps they go with that.   

 

EDIT

 

Theres one more thing that can make the destroy ending the canon ending no matter what you choose. When the catalyst is explaining about destroy, it actually shows Anderson shooting the machine. I'm wondering why it would even need to do that unless, by some chance Anderson regained consciousness, found Shepard being indoctrinated and then shot the machine. The original explanation could be that this is what Shepard see's Anderson choosing, but like always the endings were so inconsistent that they actually have a way now to fix all that depending on if they have the writers good enough to warrant a continuation of this story.

Edited November 19, 2021 by DaveMcDamage