On the off chance someone sees this post and gets confused, they're not actually getting rid of multiplayer.
What? I have been deceived and gotten my hopes up.
On the off chance someone sees this post and gets confused, they're not actually getting rid of multiplayer.
I definitely don't want a game that falls back on existing characters for cheap fan service, but I also don't mind the idea of them showing up in places that makes sense. If Mass Effect Next takes place 500 years after the end of ME3, it's still perfectly reasonable for Liara to be around as the Shadow Broker, and Wrex to be a major figure in Krogan, and perhaps galactic politics. They don't need to be around in these roles, but I wouldn't be bothered if they were.
What? I have been deceived and gotten my hopes up.
I kind of hate it when a sequel in number is not actually a sequel and a reboot or what not.
I would prefer the game to be called Mass Effect 'something' instead of Mass Effect 4.
That and 3 left a rather sour taste in my mouth.
Well I didn't roll any dice with my money and could probably solo the hardest difficulty with basic equipment faster than those that did.
Next?
or you could just play the game and keep your hard earned moneyMaybe they're just going to make it better instead of one giant F2P scheme where you have to roll the dice with your hard earned money and hope you get something good in the pack like you're buying pokemon cards or some shit.
On the off chance someone sees this post and gets confused, they're not actually getting rid of multiplayer.
I don't know, the main problem with DA2 seem to be that it was clearly rushed.
or you could just play the game and keep your hard earned money
but then again this is 2013, and no one actually plays games anymore
The lore and mythos in Mass Effect means any conflict and such can occur. I really hope there isn't narrative focus on any Reaper stuff, let sleeping plots lie.
New gen, new story and characters please. The could even start a new trilogy starring a new lead.
That's also wrong.and you have to play several rounds to afford one of the good randomized packs.
Yeah we end up saying the same thing in every thread. Mass Effect 4 could tweak ME3's MP and I could be happy or they could go full Battlefield with it and I could be happy. I'm completely open-minded as to where they could take the sequel*. As long as there are biotic and tech powers I am in. Mention any other game and I could come up with a long list of core features that it would need to include.I definitely think there's a lot of room to expand and refine that loop, and the experience in general, but they really put together something great given the time and resources and lack of any real precedent for using the ME world in that way.
Looking at Dragon Age Inquisition, it seems Bioware learned some lessons. Hopefully they take a page from their book and push it more towards an RPG than what they presented in ME2/ME3.
Trilogy ending importing, assuming ME4 is set post trilogy, is just so unthinkably impossible to me. I don't see how it could be done convincingly, realistically, and within the logistical limitations of video game development resources, time, and economy. And any attempts to do it would be littered with inconsequential outcomes to major decisions, retcons, and half arsed white washing of major events. So...about on par for the series.
But yes, I can't imagine ending importing being anything less of a disaster. Either pick a canon, make a new one, or set it so far in the future that ending choice is made irrelevant.
The whole reason ME3 returned to the stupid level based item system was because RPG purists complained about ME2's lack of loot. I hope they can dump that baggage, but I doubt they will because they want to win back 'fans.'
Are you not earning money by playing the game? Fake money is still earned money and you have to play several rounds to afford one of the good randomized packs. It's a bullshit system meant to suck money out of people like any other F2P game.
It disappoints me that the alternatives are so rarely explored. Itemization is one of the most 'phoned in' features around and people get upset when the formula isn't strictly followed.The fact that the D&D model of item acquisition & leveling is the one that was adopted by the computer gaming industry as 'RPG' Vs others like that offered up by games like Traveller which were much more character based and story driven is one of the sad indictments of the industry.
And you could call it something original, like Star Trek or something as you trek through the galaxy, exploring new worlds, meeting new civilizations, to boldy have sex with species that no man has done before...
I don't get why everyone wants the Shepherd saga continued so much.
1. The story was a big letdown and I'm not just talking about the ending.
2. Even if you didn't think it was a letdown, it ended with him saving the galaxy or it being destroyed by the reapers. Where else can it go at this point without reaching comic book levels of ridiculousness? What, you're going to bring him back with Dragon Balls or something?
Mass effect 3 ending spoiler
can this game even be set after mass effect 3? And if it can which ending do you guys think can realistically be cannon?
I see the discussion is being had above me already so i will chime in lol
Synthesis makes for a very compelling story arch imo... Theres alot you can do with that, including creating many new races.
They could possibly get away with not choosing a canon ending if they did a story completely unrelated to reapers, man vs. machine, etc etc, and had it take place far enough in the future. The only snag would be synthesis, and the cosmetic 'issue' caused by it.
Then why call it Mass Effect 4? Should be Mass Effect: "insert title here"
Mass Effect 4: Knights of the Old Protheans
Mass Effect 4: Knights of the Old Protheans
Let me tell you about the indoctrination theory
Makes perfect sense, and is plausible imo.
However cant they just make the machine half of the synthesis internal?
Even just a fifty years jump into the future will be enough to merge all the possible choices made. Just by making vague mentions to the Reaper wars, a rebuilding effort, and discovery of ancient blueprints would be enough to merge all three endings. With Control, Shepard simply leaves after his work is completed. With Destroy, all the AI and transportation stuff were simply rebuilt or hiding in shielded areas. As long as the game does not deal with Man vs Machine again, Synergy ending doesn't even matter at all. Other events like Rachni revival, genophage cured, and Geth/Quarians unity could be explained as happening regardless of Shepherd's action as long as the game doesn't specify when. Just because Shepherd didn't do it, doesn't mean that someone down the line won't encounter another opportunity.