July 9th, 2009

This is what happens when video games get involved
POSTED AT 02:27 PM in Gaming

Wes

Dave posted a fantastic, though mildly spoiler-ish summary of the facts leading into Mass Effect 2 and his thoughts on what the plot will be. It's a good write-up that addresses a lot of the outstanding loose ends in the Mass Effect universe and weaves a compelling and coherent plotline out of them.

Like any good attempt at a plot, it leaves itself open to a healthy discussion on the merits of the plot. On the other hand, any good discussion quickly spirals off from whence it began. It is in that vein that I'm re-posting the comments between Dave and I on his post. I've reorganized the statements so they can be followed more coherently. But first, go read Dave's article. I'll wait.

You back? Ok then.

Me: Good theory, but I don't think it'll pan out. Here's why.

Bioware is putting an inordinant amount of interest in the fact that there is a real possibility of dying in the final sequence, and that such a death is completely plausible as an ending. Your storyline, while I would dearly love to see it, hinges too much (I think) on the success of Shepard's mission in order to be viable as a plot.

Furthermore, Bioware is also making a big deal over not being able to replay through with characters, instead emphasizing that after the main story is completed, there will be an ability to explore additional worlds/side-quests/etc. Getting stranded on an uncharted world seems to foreclose that possibility.

Now, I agree with you fully that the plot line should involve the Collectors in some fashion, and I think that a connection between the Reapers and the Collectors is also a strong likelihood. I also feel that your supposition on the Collectors being the creators of the Reapers a fair shot. The bit about "no ships going through the Omega-4 relay ever return" seems to be a good plot point for an endgame though.

That's it for the most part. I think the main thrust of your theory is good, but I think the endgame sequence will play out differently than we think.

Dave: Points noted. I find it very difficult to reconcile BioWare's announcement of post-credits content with the archetypal 'hero cast down in shambles' denouement to a trilogy's 2nd act. In the end, I went w/ the latter in the hopes that BW could implement the former in some, to me, unforeseen way.

On the Shep dying, I truly believe that BW does not regard this as the "right" ending, and thus the player who perishes receives a completely separate ending from what BW will use to transition into ME3.

They're both good catches on your end, and leave me in a position to hope that BW has implemented scenarios we haven't yet conceived of.

The one thing that I think will be massively important but that I didn't work in here is the issue of Klencory. Supposedly there are the "lost crypts of beings of light" who were created to protect organic life from the synthetic "machine devils." So, BW's essentially laid the groundwork for whatever is on/in Klencory to be what you use to destroy/disable the Reapers.

Of course, when next Spring rolls around, all of this will be wrong.

Me: Ah yes. I remember that planet now that you mention it. I can't decide if this is a throwaway from Bioware to flesh out the mythos of the Reapers (and a mythical savior from them), or if it will be, as you suppose, massivly important.

I think it's probably going to be tied in somehow, if not in ME2 then in ME3.

Dave: I must admit, it does come off as rather red herring-ish in retrospect. I suppose one question is, at what point does forshadowing become too obvious/easy?

Me: I think at the point where it becomes like Indiana Jones 4 (see www.youtube.com for what I mean).

I mean, a single reference on a non-landable planet isn't a huge foreshadow. I expect most players won't even have visited Klencory. Even of all the players who visited the planet, it's still uncertain how many took the time to read through all the dialouge on each planet. I know that during my second run, I was just checking at the bottom to see if I could land/scan.

Personally, I think it's likely a great small foreshadow that completionist players will remember, but most fans won't realize until after playing the entire trilogy.

Me: ETA: On the dying side, here's my concern: I remember from an article that Bioware said that if you die in ME2, you'll play as "a Shepard" in ME3. Not "your" Shepard, but as Shepard nonetheless.

Two things: One, this reinforces your argument that dying isn't the "right" ending, and will likely be treated differently. It's still a viable outcome, just not the right one. Two, I still not sure how Bioware can enforce death to Shepard as a viable outcome, but then maintain continuity into ME3. Even if it's not the right outcome, it's still feasible, and the story should bear that out.

Dave: As I currently understand it, the death outcome is not intended to be rolled into ME3. It represents end game, end trilogy, finito, for your Shepard. The playing as "a" Shepard but not "your" Shepard in ME3 I've interpreted as BioWare's way of saying that ME3 would then function just as if you'd never played 1 or 2.

Me: I think you're right, I just think it's a shoddy choice continuity-wise for the second part of a trilogy.

Dave: ETA: perhaps the post-credits action could consist of your primary handler with Cerberus (presumably Miranda) feeling a stronger connection from all your time together than she does for Cerberus any longer (another archetypal action), going rogue, and rescuing you. You then have a ship, a squadmate, and the ability to re-build your crew via DLC. Just a thought.

Me: That could certainly work, especially if your handler is a potential romantic interest for Shepard. Even if they're not the person you choose to consummate teh relationship with, it still provides adequate fodder for why your handler would choose to go rogue and save you.

Dave: I imagine that Miranda will be a romantic interest in ME2. From the footage we've seen thus far, she tends to eschew armor in favour of an eye-catching body suit, and is voiced by Yvonne Strahovski.

Me: My remaining question then is: In the interest of Bioware maintaining the availability of "non-traditional" pairings, will Miranda be a character with possible romantic linkages to both male and female Shepards? Or will the Miranda character actually have a different avatar/actor depending on the gender of the PC?

Dave: I believe Miranda is likely set; I'd doubt that BioWare would cast Yvonne and only make her accessible on certain playthroughs. That said, application of a KotOR II either/or scenario pertaining to party members, e.g. Handmaiden/Disciple & Mira/Hanharr might be interesting. I already believe that BW is (somewhat) reprising KotOR II's Influence system.

On whether Miranda might be romance-able from both perspectives, there was actually a 100+ page Miranda thread on BW's forums that eventually delved into that question with much speculation and little in the way of answers.

Me: I suppose that's to be expected from a forum discussion.

Dave: With purportedly 12 potential squad members, I think there's room for only 1 swing character, as it were. In that instance, Miranda's sexuality may entirely depend on whether BioWare doubles down on the Asari card. If there is no Asari romance interest, I could definitely see Miranda playing the Silk Fox role.

Incidentally, if Ash bites it in the beginning like I think she might, I'll be gunning straight for Tali.

Me: My only thought on that is that I have no idea what Quarians look like under their suits. Does Ascension shed any light on this?

Dave: One of the characters encounters a quarian sans enviro suit, but the lighting was poor (inside a basement) and the poor sap had been tortured, so I don't recall it revealing especially much.

4 Retorts