My Advice to Bioware for the next Mass Effect

[Doom972]

I agree about 1 and 2, but not 3. The reason for this is that you need different things to do between combat maps, even if they are not as fun as combat. If you don't have that, the game will become tedious. That's also the reason why many action games have occasional "useless" puzzles. I would like to see something new to do when not in the ship or on a combat mission. Maybe a reworking of ME1's planet exploration would do the trick.

 

[Gnmish]

I'd love to see a Mass Effect sequel set say 500 years after the catastrophic events of ME3. You could have a few long lived Asari and Krogan carry over to give it a bit of flavor, but the feel could be a lot more primitive, a bit like Fallout.

The Krogan could be having a civil war between those wanting to build an empire and those wanting to cooperate, the Asari high command decide to become insular and stop interacting with the wider galaxy and in amongst all of this is the reestablishment of new Relay networks being built by different races. The hundreds of years where interstellar space travel was curtailed to a crawl could have lead to various factions cropping up and alliances and all out warfare reminiscent of Europe in the dark ages could be the norm.

Unfortunately I think they have already said that the next ones will be prequels, so we all know how it will end

 

[votemarvel]

I think Bioware need to remember where their strength lies and that is with the characters they create.

 

[Mikejames]

They can't have the annihilation of all life happening again, so really scaling down is the only way to go.

Yeah, I have a hard time picturing a galaxy spanning war that doesn't feel watered down compared to the build-up of the Reapers.

I could get behind the idea of a more personal story. Like Mass Effect's version of Firefly.

 

[white_wolf]

Did you post on the BSN OP?

Anyway:

I'm fine with the whole save the galaxy sure I could save my farm, or my home world but I like the big scale. I also love how they piled on the pressure for ME3 I felt like a Commander with all these things popping up people to save, friends to help, things to takeout and kill by the end even after doing 100% of the sidequest I still was on pins and needles wondering if I did enough.

I don't mind them mentioning shep I just don't like the idea that they'll pick which ending to canonize because them canonizing synthesis or control is just absurd. I say set the new universe 2,000 - 10,000 years into the future to avoid this problem.

I agree with you no toy ship piloting I hated driving my ship around! I liked ME's system better I don't mind a loading screen between solar systems.

 

[guitarsniper]

On your first one, I definitely agree. If Bioware could successfully do what they tried to do in the transition from Dragon Age Origins to Dragon Age 2, I'd be very happy.

2: I'm fine with mentioning shepard, but make it very vague "Shepard was a hero" type stuff, and make it relatively rare so that when Shepard is mentioned, it really matters.

3: replace the ship driving bits with some actual space combat!

 

[MHR]

My advice is that they should make another franchise because anything after that cluster-F in 3 is going to feel like obligatory EA cash sequel.

I played ME 2 times.

I played ME2 4-5 times.

I played ME3 1 time.

I'm not going to play a 4. This isn't some "lets 'boycott' Left 4 dead 2 and break down and buy it anyway!" fanboy fit, if 4 comes along I'm not even going to care.

 

[Dandark]

My advice would be to leave Mass effect and make a new franchise. Maybe another sci-fi one with inspiration from mass effect but I wouldn't even be bothered with a new mass effect game.

It won't happen because of EA though. Even if they did I imagine that it would be boring and not very fun duo to them being owned by EA. All their recent games have been really disappointing, im not even sure if I want to get DA3 anymore especially if it's going to follow the same pattern the ME series did.

 

[Mycroft Holmes]

My advice is to just steal ideas from FTL and Mount and Blade and then shove them into an open ended Mass Effect game where you travel around in a spaceship doing whatever you want.

Also another game that is solely multiplayer, structured around campaign style adventures like l4d rather than wave defence like ME3. They can use characters with personalities and create 5 part mini adventures; potentially with a degree of choice to them like TOR.

 

[Weaver]

My advice would be to just not make another mass effect.

 

[happyninja42]

Ok so, in sort of a cluster response to the gestalt I see of answers to suggestion 1.

"It's got to be scaled back, you can't go bigger than Galaxy size threat"

Yes, technically this is true, though I can promise you some writer out there will try and find a bigger threat. I'm not talking so much about the geographical size of the threat, so much as the scope and scale of it. It's more a problem with their execution of it. They tried to pump up this galactic Reaper threat, to engender tension and drama, and it just didn't work. All of the tragedy and loss of the Reaper Invasion was background, I didn't see any of it, I didn't know any of the people being slaughtered, or fighting triumphantly in tiny battles to save each others lives. I had zero investment in their struggles, because the game put zero investment into their struggles. So my point was "why bother with it if you're not going to make it something we encounter in game?"

The tension of the Reaper Invasion of earth was totally lost because I hopped into a shuttle and flew away in a dramatic loading screen of hyperdrive lines. The loss of the Turian homeworld, an orangey blob on a matte painting background, was nothing to me. I couldn't sit there and ponder the loss of an entire city of people, reduced to molten slag, because I was too busy shooting at things behind my chest high wall.

If you want these things to be significant to the plot, then include them in the plot. I was WAY more interested in what Anderson was doing with the earth resistance than what Shepherd was doing. Why not have a game where you defend one planet? I mean each "planet" we visit was reduced to a 1 city/zone map, that you show up, say "I need help with the Reapers!" and then you never go back. That's not how you invest a player in what's going on, they were literally all walk on scenes that were throw away. Give me one planet, or one continent, city, whatever, and make me CARE about what's going on. Don't tell me that an entire city was infested by the Reapers and turned into husks, and that one of them was someone I vaguely recall from 2 games ago in a side comment. Show me, their fight, make me part of that fight, even if it's just a slow retreat to try and save as many as possible. When you try and stretch a thin threat over a galaxy, you don't get a lot of depth to it. That's my main point. That it's easier to make a plot mean more to a player, when its a smaller and well crafted one, as opposed to just banking on Bigger is Better.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

My advise would be use ME1 as the base, use ME2-3 mechanics for shooting only.
Have a highly customizable Mako like vehicle to be used to slowly check out a world or use the planet scanner.

Offer more customizable mods and equipment.

Add melee weaopns.

Have a better Menu system for inventory, one where the the highest damage/defense stats are on top so you can quickly and mindlessly equip your characters.

Now offer better travel services as so you can quickly get nearly anywhere in a city map via the menu screen or at a station.

Keep the universe travel system but have things setup so you never have to use it unless you want to deal with all those pesky side quests and such. Other wise you will be taken to the next mission by talking with the pilot.

Offer silly but fun out of combat hover board, floating and hover skate style things to make running through the larger towns less annoying.

Offer fast travel for impatient people so you can fast travel to any place you have already been and I mean any item/weapon shop,stall,ect just click around on the map to select it.

Use the planet scanner or Mako to find extras stuff. Most plot devices are found automatically and you may or may not need to go down and get it.

Other than that I do not care just make me a deep game mechanic wise that's fun.

 

[Fox12]

This is a simple list of suggestions to make the next ME game better than ME 3. Now personally I thought ME 3 was pretty good. It had it's flaws sure, but it didn't engender in me, the nerd rage I've seen online. It's simply my opinion, so feel free to say I'm full of it if you disagree.

1. Scale down the size of the conflict
ME 3's Big Epic End of the Universe plot was so huge, so clunky, that it was literally relegated to the background. I never really felt any significant tension, or ominous empending doom, because all the stuff the Reapers were doing was happening off camera, or was simply an animated background screensaver, while I'm running around the chest high wall map, shooting smaller threats. When your big threat isn't actually part of the story/action, it's not a threat, its backdrop. Make the story about one planet, or one solar system maybe, nothing bigger. Bigger doesn't always mean better. To use a classic example, the first Die Hard movie. Very small scale, isolated environment for the action to take place, minimal list of protagonists/antagonists. Give me an N7 team that's been tasked with saving a city, or planet, or solar system, from a very specific, reasonably sized threat, and I will be a happy camper.

2. Don't mention Shepherd. No, really, don't bring him up. Don't have cameos from the original crew's survivors. The universe is a big freaking place, and while everyone might know about Shepherd's sacrifice, it doesn't mean it's going to come up all the time, with every person. Give me a group of people who have way more urgent things on their plate than talking about what Shepherd did. Just because the game is in the ME'verse, doesn't mean it revolves around Shepherd.

3. Don't do the space travel map stuff. Really did anyone enjoy that stuff? I didn't. It felt like busy work between combat maps, that I was compelled to do in order to get upgraded equipment. Otherwise it was simply a loading screen between chest high wall maps. We have characters who are engineers, scientists, etc, that we spend points into to make them more powerful in these skill sets....let them be the mechanic for upgrading gear. As we put points into their mechanical/scientific skill, it opens up new upgrade options for our weapons/armor and ships. You did something similar in the first ME with the security on the doors, and I liked that, do something similar.


Just a friendly list of suggestions from a fan, that has enjoyed the series, and hopes to see the series being as good, or better in the future.

I agre with all but 3. They need to do what Nintendo did with Majoras mask. Think about it, they had to make a sequel to the most critically acclaimed game of all time. They had half the amount of time to make the sequel than they had to make the original. If they tried to simply make a OoT 2 then they would have failed, and they knew it. Instead they told a smaller, far more personal story. It was scaled down, and VERY tightly designed, with any number of things going on at any given place at any given time, and almost all the NPC's have a personality. What it lost in scale it made up for in depth, and many consider Majoras Mask to be the best Zelda game to date. It's a stunning success story because they realized that if they wanted to make a sequel as good as the original than they would have to do something completely diffrent.

If Mass Effect 4 focuses entirely on developing a very small crew of mercenaries/smugglers/guards then it could be interesting. I would love to see something like firefly. Instead of trying to save the galaxy you could be fighting to protect a small border colony filled with relatives and likable NPC's. If you keep coming back to it throughout the game, and things change and evolve, then you could become very attached to the place. A million deaths is a statistic, one death is a tragedy. If they build a connection to this place, or even just a small group of characters, than that would provide all the motivation the player needs. You can't do a larger scale epic than trying to save all forms of existence for all eternity from permanent extinction. This needs to be it's own story with almost nothing to do with the original trilogy at all, except for occupying the same universe. It would be interesting to try and talk yourself out of trouble if you're ship just got boarded by alliance soldiers, and you're carrying illegal contraband.

Is Bioware going to do this? Probably not, they're owned by EA, and corporate suits want to hear developers promise "bigger and more epic" not "smaller and more personal." If they did this I would probably buy the game, there's actually a TON of room for them to move into an entirely new direction, especially with the smuggler idea. We've almost never seen the Batarian homeworlds, and we've never had Batarian squad mates. We've never visited the Hanar homeworld. So yeah, Bioware, make Firefly: the game.

 

[Genocidicles]

snip

One of the concept artists who worked on ME3 made some art to show the far off future of the synthesis ending. Not sure if it's canon of course, but I think it'd be an interesting game:

This image was purely speculative on my part. I imagined the galaxy changed by the synthesis choice. Because life and technology were joined (and I didn't know the Mass Relays would be destroyed yet) I imagined that there would be no more need for space ships. Any creature could just link in with the nearest relay and jump to any world they chose, surface to surface. This would start changing the biology of every creature in the galaxy as they would no longer be limited to any one environment. Here are some Asari/Salarian/Human/? in the far, far future taking a carefree stroll in the grass.

http://mattrhodesart.blogspot.ca/2013/07/concept-art-behind-scenes.html

I think it'd lose the pulpy feel of Mass Effect and end up being more like a Sci-Fantasy or something though.

 

[Bluestorm83]

I don't want a 4th ME game. The only ending that could have ever happened for my Shepard was the one where everyone everywhere dies because my Shepard was the kind of guy who never ever compromises what he knows is right. For better or worse, he told the Starboy to go fuck himself, and organic life just kinda failed in that cycle. There's no way to make a sequel without retconning that ending (which I am for, BTW. I believe that no war is worth fighting unless you can WIN it.)

If they DO make a sequel, though, I agree with 90% of what the OP said here. Especially number 1. ME1 had the best story of the 3, hands down, and most of that was due to Saren Arterius. Sure, HE wasn't the big terrible threat, but he was the face we put to the enemy. "Bad shit's gonna happen? We can't stop it? Oh wait, we CAN, by shooting THAT asshole there!" He was antagonist, enemy, goal, and setting. The whole game was "Saren is gonna cause some bad bad shit." Even after we knew that Saren was just a puppet to Nazara (Sovereign,) we didn't immediately switch to "Okay, rally systems, build fleet assets, recruit the Krogan..." No, we said, "That mother fucker is going to Virmire? Fuck that, let's go blow his shit up!"

 

[Gergar12_v1legacy]

My suggestion for Mass Effect 4? Don't make it.

We don't need another Mass Effect. The first three were fine. The trilogy is done. It's over. The galaxy is saved, the Reapers are gone, end of story.

They were fun while they lasted, but I don't want to see Mass Effect become the new Assassin's Creed.

I agree. Don't milk Mass Effect. It would insult the Mass Effect 1-3 to milk it.

 

[Treeinthewoods]

Make it about a C-Sec unit, base the whole story on the citadel. For as big as that place is I think I have seen about .0001% of the place.

For overarching plot, well... I don't know. Something threatens the Citadel and you need to save the day with the help of your unit. Each member could be more idealistic or pragmatic so that as you make your characters choices they become more loyal and powerful or possibly even betray you if you are handling things in a way they disagree with.

The actual story shouldn't be handled by me though, lol.

 

[Spacemonkey430]

Here's one for you: don't punish the Paragades. I'd like to see a sort of method by which you don't have to be the most holy angel force of good or the biggest asshole ever to travel the galaxy. There were renegade options in ME2 that didn't strike me as very renegade-y at all and some that were just ridiculous. Can't I be a sort of anti-hero? More willing to break the rules to get things done but not a totally horrible person. That would be nice.

 

[Resesque]

Make it about a C-Sec unit, base the whole story on the citadel. For as big as that place is I think I have seen about .0001% of the place.

For overarching plot, well... I don't know. Something threatens the Citadel and you need to save the day with the help of your unit. Each member could be more idealistic or pragmatic so that as you make your characters choices they become more loyal and powerful or possibly even betray you if you are handling things in a way they disagree with.

The actual story shouldn't be handled by me though, lol.

When I first read your post my initial reaction was that I'd love to see a potential ME4 take place anywhere but the Citadel. That said I think it comes down to the way ME3 treated the place. If they used the same kind of hub as the original ME, but gave us an even broader range of locations I think it could work.

Looking at the C-Sec section of the Mass Effect Wiki, there are a few different divisions but the Special Response seem to get a lot of variety in assignments whilst still being boots on the ground.

Special Response: Officers who deal with hostage situations, bombs, and heavily armed criminals. In the event the Citadel is attacked, they are the front line of interior defense, armed with military-grade weaponry.

If I were writing the game I'd make you a newly promoted team leader - you'd get a choice of backgrounds based on the divisions of C-Sec (replacing the Pre-Service History options you had when creating Shepard) and a Psychological Profile as well. Both options here would give you access to certain assignments, dialogue choices and contacts as the game progressed.

Maybe even have the prologue as you playing the final mission in your old team before being promoted. If so I could see that playing out in a similar vein to Dragon Age: Origins.

You'd need to recruit a team as well, so you've got to get three of four people you want to work with from various divisions of C-Sec. Have the option to tag along with some of your potential recruits, get an idea of their personalities. Obviously with tagging along a few of those assignments can go sideways so the player can get involved. Alternatively some of them you could just use the conversation wheel to actively interview them for a position on your team.

Who you recruit will have an effect on how your team reacts to your decisions, and how your superiors interact with you as well. They're gonna be a lot sterner if you decided to recruit a squad full of loose cannons. Also have ME2 style loyalty missions, where you're tying up loose ends for your recruits before they're willing to join up.

Is that gang of low-level drug pushers a necessary evil? Do you save that Ambassador because it's the right thing to do, even though he's pushing hard for unpopular reforms? Do you do everything by the book? Are you zero tolerance? Do you blur the lines and let some things go in pursuit of worse offenders?

One of the things I think worked in Alpha Protocol was the faction systems, making your enemies into friends and vice versa. I could see something like that being implemented into a game like this, letting you adjust the balance of power on the Citadel.

TLR I could really see a C-Sec game working letting you balance action and intrigue.