BioWare Teases Another Mass Effect, DLC, New Universe

I think it just goes to show how little involved they, the doctors, have been in BioWare as a whole. It hasn't really been the company they founded for a long time and I would bet that is why they decided to leave and do something that they still cared about. Don't think they should have sold to EA in the first place because BioWare was never about yearly installments to me. Was always about producing quality, no matter how long it takes.

Thanks to ME3 I've lost all interest in the series. The ending of that game killed the franchise for me. Happy for those that can still enjoy it though.

No thanks, I'm good.

@Olivaw said:

@tremors said:

@cwJoe said:

@Maitimo said:

There is nowhere to go from Mass Effect 3, surely? Better to just be done with it and not have the series outstay its welcome.

The Mass Effect universe doesn't revolve around Shepard.

It most certainly does. Any game without Shepard in it will be Mass Effect in name only.

Completely disagree. The main trilogy is Shepard's story, but that universe is too damn cool to just leave it be.

No idea whatsoever how they could ever set anything after 3, though. Probably prequels set during various historical events. Which would be damn cool!

They have laid the seeds for a lot of stories in the universe , besides Shepard wasn't so much of a character but an avatar for you. I hope their new game starts an established character maybe just a normal guy rather than a marine... that would be pretty cool.

@tremors: Halo Reach wasn't about Master Chief yet it was a Halo.

I'm interested in more ME3 DLC and the new IP, not so much for a new ME game. They can't set it post-ME3 and they can't set it pre-First Contact War, so there's only a very small window to tell stories and it's always going to be in the shadow of the much larger and more important story of Shepard.

Wow, lots of negativity. Guess that shouldn't surprise me...

I think it's awesome though! The ME universe has a TON to offer and a TON of awesome stories. I can't wait to see what they do next.

I've spent way too much time reading the Codex to give up on this universe after 3 games. I hope they really go nuts exploring all the weird races they've created, like the Hanar. I've had enough of humans.

Couldn't give a shit.

@Temg99 said:

Mass Effect Three felt rushed and over promised what they truly could never, ever live up to their promises. Don't let Mass Effect 4 fall into the same trap. Give them 3+ years to develop a full storyline, world and RPG system that everyone can enjoy. Don;'t force them into a 2 year cycle of endless rush so you can have a "BioWare" game every year. You will just destroy the BioWare brand.

You get the idea for the rest. All I want is time given to make the game great. I trust the talent at BioWare can then do something amazing with that time.

BioWare never spent over 3 years to make a game until Dragon Age: Origins (which had a troubled development). Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't 5 years in the making, it came out two years after the original. I don't know if you know a lot about independent development, but you don't have the option to spend forever making a game either. Eventually you need to have money coming in or the lights aren't going to stay on.

You never want to spend 5 years making a game anyways, because when it comes out, it's on 5 year old technology. You start getting past two and a half or three years of active development, and you're working backwards at some point.

I fucking hate franchises.

I didn't get the impression from 2 and 3 that they're capable of making another ME1.

it's so hard to care about this, I should but I don't

@Trylks said:

You know they could have a "BioWare" game every year with a 5 year development cycle per game if they had 5 franchises, right?

My "force them into a 2 year cycle of endless rush so you can have a "BioWare" game every year." was more of a single franchise comment than "BioWare" game itself. But you fo have a very valid point. Here is my take:

Resources are very limited. Especially in today's very expensive game creation cycle.

There is a benefit to selecting a few key games and letting others to mature until you are flush with cash and have the profits to play. Focusing across multiple annual cycles with one game a year requires lots of development studios, lots of employees and lots of overhead. Things that demand a lot of money, especially from a public company that has to answer to shareholders.

In my business we produce a lot of products. But we also know our time and resources are limited. If we focused our efforts across the entire spectrum, our experts who are essential to our business would have to spread their time across multiple products at once, instead of one or two. Thus increasing the likelihood of errors, poor design and customer complaints. We improve our profits and grow our business better by focusing efforts on a few key portfolios and then having the others on an as needed basis.

Now video games are very, very different from manufacturing, much longer development cycles to name one point. But the inherent business principles are the same. BioWare could do much better by focusing their talent [coding, tech, QA, support, etc] across a few games and making sure they are top tier efforts that take the time to properly produce than artificially forcing on them a 2 year development cycle per franchise.

I would like to see a new Mass Effect if it's the same world with different stuff.

As bad as Mass Effect 3 was, I could probably go for a non-Shepard centered game. Two was so good because it wasn't forcing a big conclusion to the trilogy. I felt like I became deeply invested in the universe and had fun doing all the extra missions, getting to know the characters. All the extra stuff in 3 seemed to only serve getting the "good" ending and was so boring and plot less. Everything in 3 was just a means to an end. A new game set in the universe that isn't forced to a conclusion could be good. But I will stay skeptical until the day it comes out.

@cwJoe said:

@Maitimo said:

There is nowhere to go from Mass Effect 3, surely? Better to just be done with it and not have the series outstay its welcome.

The Mass Effect universe doesn't revolve around Shepard.

No, but it does deal with what's now a finite span of time with limited scope for the kind of game that BioWare makes. As long as humanity drives the plot and they're compelled to have your decisions affect the galaxy at large, they haven't a lot to work with.

I just want to cruise the galaxy in my fly space ship and hang with my bros. None of this "saving the galaxy" non-sense.

I still love the world and the people in the universe so I am excited for a new ME game, even if I am less excited than I was before ME3.

I'm torn. I don't know if the Mass Effect universe would be able to live without Shepard in my mind. That'd be like a FFX world with no Tidus, or a Star Ocean: The 2nd Story with no Ashton.

Yes, the Mass Effect universe exists without Shepard, but after being the biggest hero ever in the galaxy, going back and being some no name Turian would be seriously lacking.

@Brodehouse said:

BioWare never spent over 3 years to make a game until Dragon Age: Origins (which had a troubled development). Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't 5 years in the making, it came out two years after the original. I don't know if you know a lot about independent development, but you don't have the option to spend forever making a game either. Eventually you need to have money coming in or the lights aren't going to stay on.

You never want to spend 5 years making a game anyways, because when it comes out, it's on 5 year old technology. You start getting past two and a half or three years of active development, and you're working backwards at some point.

Very valid point on the technology. I accept your view and take back my comment on the cycle time.

I totally understand that games are a business. They are between two massive rocks that are threatening to crush them at any point. On one side EA and BioWare have shareholders they are required to listen to and keep happy. Thus releasing very profitable games in every fiscal year. On the other they have to keep customers [gamers] happy by releasing a quality product in a environment where switching costs are very low. Their competition costs nearly the exact same to purchase and is just as appealing to many, many gamers.

One group demands a game a year [and more]. Another group demands they do it right and give quality. Hard to have both. I side with the idea that if you build it right, the customers will become more fervent fans and more likely to purchase other games from the same brand. Take EA sports games as an example. No matter how many some complain, they have done an absolutely excellent job as balancing the two sides. I feel with BioWare they are still too far on the shareholder appeasement side and have yet to find a common ground. Thus my wish.

The Doctors were among my favourite game developers. It's really too bad that they decided to move on. I don't know if it was a case of them just tiring of the gaming industry or if all the recent shit storms surrounding their games took it out of them.

I am a firm believer that the EA acquisition of Bioware severely impacted their design of games but I think everyone knew Bioware was not going to be on the top forever. I hope those two return to games one day (although it seems unlikely) and try to capture lightning in a bottle once more.

Wow, I missed the whole thing with the Doctors stepping down... that is a shame. Feels odd to think of that company name without the two of them.

Wish them both the best and I'm really interested in seeing where they go from here.

Meh. I'm kind of done with the series, didn't play ME3 so I can't be bothered to care about more Mass Effect.

@Temg99 said:

What I want next from a Mass Effect game? Only one thing. Simple too: EA, Let Them Take Their Time.

Thats the TLDR idea. In a bit more thought out - Don't rush the game in seek of annual revenue generation. Yes games are a business and yes you must make money to make these horrendously expensive games. But take a book from Valve or Blizzard who have a few, very highly developed franchises like BioWare does. Games they let simmer, take their time and when come out are pure gold.

Mass Effect Three felt rushed and over promised what they truly could never, ever live up to their promises. Don't let Mass Effect 4 fall into the same trap. Give them 3+ years to develop a full storyline, world and RPG system that everyone can enjoy. Don;'t force them into a 2 year cycle of endless rush so you can have a "BioWare" game every year. You will just destroy the BioWare brand.

You get the idea for the rest. All I want is time given to make the game great. I trust the talent at BioWare can then do something amazing with that time.

Bravo sir, that's EXACTLY how I felt.

@Brodehouse said:

@Temg99 said:

Mass Effect Three felt rushed and over promised what they truly could never, ever live up to their promises. Don't let Mass Effect 4 fall into the same trap. Give them 3+ years to develop a full storyline, world and RPG system that everyone can enjoy. Don;'t force them into a 2 year cycle of endless rush so you can have a "BioWare" game every year. You will just destroy the BioWare brand.

You get the idea for the rest. All I want is time given to make the game great. I trust the talent at BioWare can then do something amazing with that time.

BioWare never spent over 3 years to make a game until Dragon Age: Origins (which had a troubled development). Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't 5 years in the making, it came out two years after the original. I don't know if you know a lot about independent development, but you don't have the option to spend forever making a game either. Eventually you need to have money coming in or the lights aren't going to stay on.

You never want to spend 5 years making a game anyways, because when it comes out, it's on 5 year old technology. You start getting past two and a half or three years of active development, and you're working backwards at some point.

I'm fairly sure the original Mass Effect comes close if not more. I recall it was announced more than two years before release and I heard it had a troubled development cycle. I think it was the Bombcast that mentioned 7 years, but they aren't exactly a completely trustworthy source even about stuff like that.

I thought the Leviathan DLC was pretty good, so I'm looking forward to the Omega DLC. Although I do think they should take their time with a brand new game.

I wonder how well the last dlc did for them, I can't see a lot of people went back to play it like they did (and I certainly did) with ME2.

@Temg99 said:

@Brodehouse said:

BioWare never spent over 3 years to make a game until Dragon Age: Origins (which had a troubled development). Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't 5 years in the making, it came out two years after the original. I don't know if you know a lot about independent development, but you don't have the option to spend forever making a game either. Eventually you need to have money coming in or the lights aren't going to stay on.

You never want to spend 5 years making a game anyways, because when it comes out, it's on 5 year old technology. You start getting past two and a half or three years of active development, and you're working backwards at some point.

Very valid point on the technology. I accept your view and take back my comment on the cycle time.

I totally understand that games are a business. They are between two massive rocks that are threatening to crush them at any point. On one side EA and BioWare have shareholders they are required to listen to and keep happy. Thus releasing very profitable games in every fiscal year. On the other they have to keep customers [gamers] happy by releasing a quality product in a environment where switching costs are very low. Their competition costs nearly the exact same to purchase and is just as appealing to many, many gamers.

One group demands a game a year [and more]. Another group demands they do it right and give quality. Hard to have both. I side with the idea that if you build it right, the customers will become more fervent fans and more likely to purchase other games from the same brand. Take EA sports games as an example. No matter how many some complain, they have done an absolutely excellent job as balancing the two sides. I feel with BioWare they are still too far on the shareholder appeasement side and have yet to find a common ground. Thus my wish.

Your talking out of your arse.##

Nothing matters more than releasing a quality game.

Without the extreme high quality games and great reputation , you won't have a business.

Best news I've heard all day, especially given the recent retirement.

Mass Effect is my favorite game series of all time, ever.

I'm glad they finally confirmed the Omega DLC!

But, thanks to the whiners, they retired two key faces from BioWare. Not a good thing... but I know the right people will be there. I hope.

(Being as optimistic as I can.)

I want more Mass Effect but I don't want prequels, which is what new games would have to be unless they pulled a Blizzard and said "Red ending is canon" or something like that. Humans were only on the galactic scene for 29 years before the Reapers jacked our shizz, that is a fairly narrow window in time where you're going to bump up on other bits of the franchise real quick. As an example Shepard was famous around 8 years before the end of the series, cutting down the timeline even further without Shep.

@Aas said:

I just want to cruise the galaxy in my fly space ship and hang with my bros. None of this "saving the galaxy" non-sense.

and have some sort of companion i care for......

Find it hard to care after how Mass Effect 3 was even more of a corridor shooter than 2, and that was already mostly just corridor shooting.

After that ending... do we really want any more games? Ugh.

I don't have any faith in Casey Hudson's ability to execute either project.

@Baltimore said:

I believe that these announcements would be filed under 'Damage Control'.

EA: "Hey gamers! Don't pay any attention to that news! LOOK OVER HERE! SHINYS!"

If you want to see damage control, start reading the comments starting at about page 8 in the 'Doctors leave BioWare' article posted today. It was like someone suddenly flipped a switch, and around 20% of the comments became "Stop attacking EA!"

@MEATBALL: It was Casey Hudson that screwed up the ending. Took one writer to the side, locked themselves in and wrote the ending. Had the ending produced, the rest of the writers went "Ok we ship soon, how about that ending we are to write?" Casey goes "Its already done, dont worry about it."

And we see how that went. One writer had to fight hard to just get the farewell moments before the final push, which redeemed the original ending a little.

So my opinion is, Casey is just as likely to screw as if he wasn't in charge. There is probably more faith, however my trust is lost. Dosnt matter I have given up on EA completely and shall not pay attention to all EA including Mass Effect, that whole ending shit killed it for me.

Hopefully they actually have some kind of post-ME3 vision for the universe, and the new game isn't just some cop-out prequel.

@tovardy: They could have the main characters be aliens.

I'd be into that.

@Brodehouse said:

@Temg99 said:

Mass Effect Three felt rushed and over promised what they truly could never, ever live up to their promises. Don't let Mass Effect 4 fall into the same trap. Give them 3+ years to develop a full storyline, world and RPG system that everyone can enjoy. Don;'t force them into a 2 year cycle of endless rush so you can have a "BioWare" game every year. You will just destroy the BioWare brand.

You get the idea for the rest. All I want is time given to make the game great. I trust the talent at BioWare can then do something amazing with that time.

BioWare never spent over 3 years to make a game until Dragon Age: Origins (which had a troubled development). Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't 5 years in the making, it came out two years after the original. I don't know if you know a lot about independent development, but you don't have the option to spend forever making a game either. Eventually you need to have money coming in or the lights aren't going to stay on.

You never want to spend 5 years making a game anyways, because when it comes out, it's on 5 year old technology. You start getting past two and a half or three years of active development, and you're working backwards at some point.

Skyrim took 5 years of development, and sold over 12 million copies & counting. TES games are usually on a 5 year cycle.

XCOM has also been in development for 5 years, and pre-sales are very good. Then there's all the Civilization games coming out 5 years apart. So, it's also a Firaxis staple.

I was really surprised that you didn't get to go to Omega in the main story so at least it will be DLC....Hopefully it will be meaningful as well.

Kinda itching to play through ME3 again on Insanity but the prospect of new DLC is making me want to hold off to get the extra xp you would get from doing the missions.

Sad to see the Doctors go. Who knows how this franchise will turn out.

...

One thing that keeps springing to mind with this news 'remember how Assassins Creed was supposed to be trilogy and then the main dudes who were working on it left and then it became a cash cow'. This is my only fear

@LegendaryChopChop said:

But, thanks to the whiners, they retired two key faces from BioWare. Not a good thing... but I know the right people will be there. I hope.

(Being as optimistic as I can.)

You have a child's comprehension of the situtation between ea and the former founders of bioware. How would "whiners" affect a huge buyout from back in 2007 with a standard non-compete and retention clause?

I mean, its ok to not understand, and its ok that you are likely a child, but really. Wild assertions like this are just sad. You can do better. You can make yourself smarter. You'll have to spend time working at it, but there is still hope for you to spruce up your reasoning, debate and deduction skills. We are all with you on this, TO THE LIBRARY! GO TEAM EDUKATE!

@Rekt_Hed: Yea but the only difference between AC and ME is that ME 3 was a conclusion to a story, wherever they go from this point in the ME universe they got no choice to 'go boldly into a new frontier' (Yea I probably got that wrong but f #ck it :p) hopefully with a new main character that is inspired by Shepard and not his/her kid.

I should be thrilled about the idea of more ME DLC AND a new game. A year ago, I would have been.

But I'm not. Not at all.

@TudsGamol said:

@LegendaryChopChop said:

But, thanks to the whiners, they retired two key faces from BioWare. Not a good thing... but I know the right people will be there. I hope.

(Being as optimistic as I can.)

You have a child's comprehension of the situtation between ea and the former founders of bioware. How would "whiners" affect a huge buyout from back in 2007 with a standard non-compete and retention clause?

I mean, its ok to not understand, and its ok that you are likely a child, but really. Wild assertions like this are just sad. You can do better. You can make yourself smarter. You'll have to spend time working at it, but there is still hope for you to spruce up your reasoning, debate and deduction skills. We are all with you on this, TO THE LIBRARY! GO TEAM EDUKATE!

k

I completed both Mass Effect and ME2 twice each, but disliked ME3 so much that I quit halfway through it. I feel like they have a lot to prove.

If I had boned up Mass Effect as badly as they did, I'd be ready to start from scratch with a new universe, too. :P

I think I speak for everyone when I say that we want the next Mass Effect game to feature a Hanar Spectre main character, who will have "a lover in every port and a gun in every tentacle" and will spout such catch-phrases as "Enkindle THIS" or "This one has forgotten whether it's heatsink is over capacity. It wonders whether the criminal scum considers itself fortunate?"

Yes, that sounds good. Mass Effect: Blasto's Revenge. Coming Q3 2014 to PS4, Xbox 720, and Windows 8.

Can't imagine how someone could play ME3 and then want another game set in that universe.