@PoisonJam7 said:

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.

1+

The more Blasto references the better.

@akeripper4 said:

@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......

And choose to be either a good guy or a space pirate.

Quick! Deflect the news that our founders are jumping ship.

MASS EFFECT, EVERYONE! WOO!

Edit:

No wait, I changed my mind. I will buy a game where you play as Marauder Shields, no matter how crappy it is.

The more I dwell on Mass Effect 3, the more I dislike it. The more I dwell on ME1, the more it seems like a masterpiece. My problem with ME3 was that it was soulless. It felt as if BioWare was pumping out another sequel rather than developing the deep and universe they created in the first two games.

So yeah, no interest in playing another ME game anytime soon.

2015: Mass Effect : Relay Warfare 2, Free Shepard skin DLC at gamestop

I think it was pretty obvious that it was gonna happen when Dragon Age 3 was announced. The entire Dragon Age franchise is what they use as fundraiser to finance the Mass Effect games.

Bought all the ME2 DLC. Haven't touched ME3 since I finished it.

@Fredddi43 said:

Cool, I think more Mass Effect is a good thing?

after playing 3 i don't know if i want more ME.

I think I'll wait until Jeff has posted his review before I decide whether to be excited by this game or not, so I guess I'll have a couple of years of not being remotely concerned about it.

@LegendaryChopChop said:

@PoisonJam7 said:

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.

1+

The more Blasto references the better.

Man, but no Phil Hartman. As crappy as that game was, I don't want to see someone ruin that sweet character.

The mass effect universe is big enough to fit in books, comics and anime. So that's no surprise, just there will be people complaining they want a "number" game or picking off where they left off. I bet you we will see this much like other EA properties, not bad idea but then again not enough time to develop it well.

Have low expectations after ME3 let everyone down. Just imagine a third studio gets built, just to make a new FPS shooter about James Vega N7 squad.

If they make a new one, I hope they tackle a whle new genre+dialog trees. Maybe even co-development. There wasn't a single point in the game where the player got to use cutscene level biotics but the stuff shown in said cutscenes would make for a pretty awesome action game ala Bayonetta, Devil May Cry, etc. Running around beating the shit out of people with Jack or Samara would be pretty fun.

Tali and Miranda are begging for a stealth/espionage game of their own.

Could we agree to call Bioware "EA" now?

To avoid confusion for future historians.

@Temg99: I completely agree. Basicallly that's the way Blizzard works, quality is one of the ways to success on a market that is already full of games. The elasticity of supply is very high, a few developers could produce games for the whole community, and if you want to be one of those developers, quality is one of the ways to go.

In any case, increasing the number of resources to increase the production of different titles is always a possibility. It's the classical horizontal expansion, nothing new.

@buckybit said:

Could we agree to call Bioware "EA" now?

To avoid confusion for future historians.

Have you been listening to Jim Sterling?

Good call that man!

A new Mass Effect? What's the point? The whole world is done. Not interested.

Well I personally thought Mass Effect 3 was great so I'm looking forward to the next game. Here's to hoping for a setting set far into the future where we can see the ramifications of the events of the third game. I'd love to see Shepard as the omnipresent force behind the galaxy (a la the "blue" ending) and have to deal with him and a new threat while playing as a character who only hears stories of the past games. That's the direction I would take it.

As for the new fictional world, I just hope it is as cool of a world as Mass Effect. I would be interested in maybe a mix between sci-fi and fantasy or possibly a steam-punk world.

@Hitchenson said:

BioWare are a write off.

@SmasheControllers said:

Do people still care about the Omega stuff? I mean I'm down for more ME3, but I'd rather see some new stuff.

Were it to be a complete departure and an actual open city, I'd be all for it. I'd be up for a more indepth view of fewer, less galaxy shaking events. I'd like to see more of Ilium or heck, Noveria with all it's semilegal research and development.

A new universe? I liked the old one, but they did destroy all possibility of ever returning to it post ME3. I it's a good sci-fi RPG, I will buy it.

While I do think creating a new universe is definitely a plus (rather than lets say, do another shitty origins\prequel to the prequel bs), why use the Mass Effect brand? Sure, it is established, but this screams like a desperate move to keep the ME name for the next generation. Don't. Take the good stuff from the 3 ME games, learn from the (massive list) mistakes, and create something new, meaning a new name, perhaps a new premise altogether , it dosen't need the ME brand.

@mracoon said:

The more I dwell on Mass Effect 3, the more I dislike it. The more I dwell on ME1, the more it seems like a masterpiece. My problem with ME3 was that it was soulless. It felt as if BioWare was pumping out another sequel rather than developing the deep and universe they created in the first two games. So yeah, no interest in playing another ME game anytime soon.

To be fair, Mass Effect 3 is a conclusion, the universe should have already been developed. Mass Effect 1 and 2 have to set the stage. Of course you would like 1 and 2 better, they had a lot of crap to explain about the universe and how everything worked. If they tried to do the same in 3, I'm willing to bet people would hate it for "being too slow" or "already explaining things we know." I think exposition is the word to use here?

Anyway, yeah. That's my view.

@BoG said:

A new universe? I liked the old one, but they did destroy all possibility of ever returning to it post ME3. I it's a good sci-fi RPG, I will buy it.

I think the New Universe refers to a new franchise. I'm hoping they rip off Alpha Protocol and make a Spy series.

EDIT: I think @patrickklepek just worded it poorly. Here's the full quote from the Joystiq article:

Hudson is also creating a brand new game, Flynn says: "While Casey continues to oversee the development of our new Mass Effect project, he and his leads are putting together their vision for an all new game set in a fictional universe, built from the bottom-up with all new gaming technology."

Jade Empire 2.

Casey Hudson in charge is a good move. He has shown to be really responsive of criticism and is the reason the franchise exists.

I would be shocked and very worried if he weren't involved in it. He knows the series.

Oh fuck off - they've ruined it

@Wrighteous86 said:

@BoG said:

A new universe? I liked the old one, but they did destroy all possibility of ever returning to it post ME3. I it's a good sci-fi RPG, I will buy it.

I think the New Universe refers to a new franchise. I'm hoping they rip off Alpha Protocol and make a Spy series.

EDIT: I think @patrickklepek just worded it poorly. Here's the full quote from the Joystiq article:

Hudson is also creating a brand new game, Flynn says: "While Casey continues to oversee the development of our new Mass Effect project, he and his leads are putting together their vision for an all new game set in a fictional universe, built from the bottom-up with all new gaming technology."

On second look, it's... really an ambiguous statement. He simply says "an all new game set in a fictional universe." It's almost as if the first game weren't set in a fictional universe. I mean, Earth was there... Wait, maybe BioWare know something we don't know!

Anyways, I guess we just wait and see. I think it would be silly to craft a whole new universe, and then just stick the Mass Effect name on there anyways.

@Phatmac said:

They couldn't wait until next week to release this after losing the doctors?

EA is a publicly traded company... so no.

If a creator is soliciting ideas from the audience that is either a bold but planned move or it means they are out of ideas. And I also have to say that asking gamers what they want is a bit of "inmates running the assylum" where what we want is rarely a good game idea or a good game design.

Casey Hudson in charge is a good move. He has shown to be really responsive of criticism and is the reason the franchise exists.

I would be shocked and very worried if he weren't involved in it. He knows the series.

@Hailinel said:

@LegendaryChopChop

Casey Hudson in charge is a good move. He has shown to be really responsive of criticism and is the reason the franchise exists.

I would be shocked and very worried if he weren't involved in it. He knows the series.

He was the one responsible for ME3's original ending. That's not something to praise.

He was also personally responsible for the entire franchise, ME1, ME2, and the good parts of 3 as well.

One bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch. He has a lot of good on his resume.

That "one bad apple" was a pretty important piece of fruit. And decisions in other cases where not stellar either.

No thanks.

@EXTomar said:

That "one bad apple" was a pretty important piece of fruit. And decisions in other cases where not stellar either.

It doesn't decide the future, either. I will be positive on this, unlike people who are being negative. It is my favorite gaming franchise in the world, and I have been pleased with how it has been done for the most part. I think it would be far worse if someone else, especially a representative of EA, took the helm.

There is no better choice than him, honestly. It's the safest bet for the future. Anything else is unproven, at least he has a good track record for it.

@NTM: While so right, i always found the universe of Mass Effect itself to be very standard and boring anyway. Characters and story is what made the games special not the world itself.

@SmokePants: True i think reboot is the way to go here, no Shepard this time and a choice in species (that would take a long time with many different story lines...so i don't know if they would ever so that.)

@mracoon said:

The more I dwell on ME1, the more it seems like a masterpiece.

It really wasn't. They win points for trying to do something relatively original at the time in terms of game style, but there wasn't a single aspect of that game that could be considered anything more than 'decent'. Except maybe the codec - which is really the only place where the universe was fleshed out - but the font was so fucking small I never spent any time with it.

@LegendaryChopChop Are you kidding? The reason why the ending of Mass Effect 3 is so screwed up is because they wanted to setup a situation for more games. They needed to leave the Mass Effect universe in a state where:

- Shepard is "indisposed"

- Shepard wins "something"

- The Reapers are still around

Congrats they pulled it off....too bad to get it there required hand crafting a mind boggling experience that left a lot of players confused and mad. I'm sure that is exactly what Casey Hudson wanted to do to launch into a new series, right?

@LikeaSsur: No offense but Tidus was the worst part of X for me, Mass Effect is going to need to distance itself from Shepard and the characters of 1-3 to continue for me, they wont live past the stigma of that ending.

@MarkWahlberg: I respect a game that tries something new and is able to pull it off than a decent game that feels pulled from many others, that's why me1 still stands out for so many while 2/3 are still compared to Gears of War with good story.

My thoughts:

Any Mass Effect news, I'm ok with.

@Viking_Funeral said:

@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.

Skyrim did not have 5 years of active development. Development is not the same as 'years from the last game'. It had 3 years after they finished with Fallout 3. The Elder Scrolls are more popular than any franchise BioWare has ever had. You might as well point to Call of Duty's 2 year cycle as the reason it sold 25 million copies last year.

XCOM (the shooter, I assume?) has also not had 5 years of active development, because Marin was making BioShock 2. By the time it comes out it will have had 3 years. Unless you're talking about the strategy game, in which case, it's had 4 years of development, much of it shared with Civilization 5.

@Brodehouse said:

Skyrim did not have 5 years of active development. Development is not the same as 'years from the last game'. It had 3 years after they finished with Fallout 3. The Elder Scrolls are more popular than any franchise BioWare has ever had. You might as well point to Call of Duty's 2 year cycle as the reason it sold 25 million copies last year.

XCOM (the shooter, I assume?) has also not had 5 years of active development, because Marin was making BioShock 2. By the time it comes out it will have had 3 years. Unless you're talking about the strategy game, in which case, it's had 4 years of development, much of it shared with Civilization 5.

EDIT: No, I am not not talking about the shooter. I'm talking about the much more popular TBS game. I'll be surprised if the shooter doesn't get scrapped at this point.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/02/01/xcom-enemy-unknown-preview/

RPS: (laughs) How long have you been doing it for?
Jake Solomon: This project, we’ve been doing it for three and a half years at this point. I mean, some guys, some of the early art staff have been on it for four years at this point, so we’ve been in development for a really long time.

That is from an interview 8 months ago, or last February 1st. So technically anywhere from 4 years to 4.75 years.

I can find sources on the other ones as well, if you want to get really into it, but I think we both know that is a waste of our time.

Really? We're still not over all this "ME3 ending sucks" crap? I would go on a rant of my my own, but this summarises my thoughts too well:

http://badassdigest.com/2012/08/06/film-crit-hulk-smash-a-few-words-on-the-ending-of-mass-effect-3/

@Viking_Funeral: Development on XCOM began in 2008, that would make it 4 years. Like I said. Would you prefer 4.5 years? You can look for sources on the rest, if they're different than the dates listed through wikipedia then I guess I have bad information. But Skyrim was conceptualized in 2006 and entered production after Fallout 3.

Also, knock off the smugness. It does you no credit.

@cwJoe said:

Mass Effect prequel starring Jon Grissom in the First Contact War, GO GO GO.

The guy from CSI fought Turrians on Mars? What?

@Fram said:

Really? We're still not over all this "ME3 ending sucks" crap? I would go on a rant of my my own, but this summarises my thoughts too well:

http://badassdigest.com/2012/08/06/film-crit-hulk-smash-a-few-words-on-the-ending-of-mass-effect-3/

Huh.

Fuck that guy.

The doctors leaving is sad news, but from what they've said, it sounds like their interest in this faded back in april, this news for DLC is good news! It shows that Bioware will continue to push forward and continue to do what they do.

Maybe this is what they want,take attention away from their leaving the company so that they can have the freedom they're looking for in leaving.

Besides i really doubt they'd want to cast doubt on something they created and nurtured for 17 years to this point.

I'm kinda looking forward to the next Mass Effect game despite not enjoying the last one, strange

DLC not so much