mass effect 4 – Trekking with Dennis

The Electronic Arts Buyout and Ethical Consumerism

One of the biggest news stories of the week (and one of the biggest gaming news stories of the last few years) is the sale of Electronic Arts to a private investment consortium. EA, which had previously been a publicly-traded company, is being taken into private ownership, and there’s a lot of debate about what that might mean for titles like The Sims 4, the very lucrative EA Sports franchise, and the likes of EA’s Star Wars games. We’ll touch on those subjects as we go along, but I have a big-picture question, given who’s about to own Electronic Arts: regardless of what happens to the games… is it possible to support this company, given its new owners? Or to put it another way: should we buy any EA games in the future?

Electronic Arts will soon be owned in full by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, private investment firm Silver Lake, and Affinity Partners – a company co-owned by Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, (and which also takes a lot of money from Saudi Arabia).

Saudia Arabia’s Public Investment Fund will soon own Electronic Arts.

It is not easy, given our current economic model, to be an “ethical consumer,” and some folks argue that any form of ethical consumerism isn’t possible; there’s just too many bad actors, too much corporate cross-contamination, and it’s not always easy to tell, at a glance, who owns what and where your money goes when you make a purchase. Buying something as simple as a box of chocolates might contribute to modern-day slavery on a cocoa plantation, buying cheap clothes online almost certainly means they’re made in a sweatshop in the Far East, and even something like an electric car – great for the environment and to fight climate change – may not have sourced materials like cobalt and lithium ethically.

Then there are brands. I didn’t know, until talk of the EA buyout was happening, that Saudi Arabia’s PIF already owned 10% of the shares in Electronic Arts. And the same problem happens time and again. When you go to the supermarket and you choose, for example, a brand of cat food… would you know, off the top of your head, which mega-corporation owns which brand? Did you even know that there really are only a handful of these mega-corporations, and that in some cases, the “choice” between different brands is irrelevant because they’re all ultimately owned by the same people anyway?

EA’s original logo.

If you’re at the supermarket trying to decide between Felix, GoCat, Gourmet Perle, and Purina One… that’s not actually a choice, because they’re all owned by Nestlé. Trying to choose an ice cream? It doesn’t matter if you get a Cornetto, a Magnum, Carte d’Or, or even Ben & Jerrys: Unilever owns all of those brands.

The point is this: we don’t always know who owns the businesses we buy from. The consumer marketplace is complex and opaque – deliberately so. The illusion of choice means we feel in control, but all of our money flows into the pockets of a tiny number of people at the very top. That’s late-stage capitalism, I guess.

But in some cases, where something *is* relatively clear-cut, and where a corporation or investment firm clearly is not aligned with our values and beliefs… don’t we have an obligation not to buy from them?

Stock photo of a British supermarket aisle. — It isn’t always easy to tell which brand is owned by whom.

Here on the website, I’ve talked about a couple of things that I think are relevant. In 2022, I decided that – for the first time ever – I wasn’t going to watch any football matches at the World Cup. Why? Because the World Cup that year was hosted by Qatar, a country where being homosexual or transgender is illegal, and where hundreds of underpaid workers died building the stadia that Qatar wanted to use to sportswash its image.

And in 2023, I talked about why I couldn’t play or support Hogwarts Legacy and the Harry Potter franchise in general. The owner of that franchise, into whose pockets money flows from all purchases, is incredibly transphobic, and spends money on advocating for and elevating anti-trans causes and legislation in the UK. She’s also stated that any purchases of books or merchandise will be interpreted as support for her views and positions.

In both cases, I chose not to participate, not to purchase, not to watch, and not to support organisations and individuals whose views and behaviour I felt I could not condone.

Concept art for Hogwarts Legacy. — I chose not to play *Hogwarts Legacy* in 2023.

Saudia Arabia, as recently as 2019, executed people for being gay. At the very least, being gay can result in imprisonment and corporal punishment. Women in Saudi Arabia don’t have the same rights as men, and are effectively second-class citizens. The country has executed journalists critical of its regime, routinely executes, maims, and physically punishes people for relatively minor offences and non-crimes, and just has an appalling record on human rights overall.

In recent years, prompted by the world’s painfully slow move away from oil, Saudi Arabia has begun to make investments in other industries. They’ve spent heavily in football and sport, buying teams, promoting their domestic league, establishing a new golf tournament, and successfully bidding to host the 2034 World Cup. This move to purchase Electronic Arts – the biggest sports game publisher in the world – should be seen through that lens. There’s a degree of sportswashing here, of course, but the main objective is to make money and diversify the Saudi economy beyond oil.

Stock photo of a man holding a large amount of cash. — The PIF hopes to make a lot of money out of this transaction.

I’ve seen people worried about what this might mean for the future of some of their favourite Electronic Arts games. And that is a fair concern: an investment consortium like this is concerned exclusively with making money, so I think you can expect to see EA’s already heavily-monetised games getting even worse on that front. It’s also quite possible that the new corporate entity will be less likely to invest in new IP, seeing it as too much of a risk. Single-player games could also be on the chopping block.

I get that these are valid concerns. If you’re really looking forward to a game like the next Mass Effect, the sequel to Jedi: Survivor, or another EA single-player title, yeah… you should be worried, because the new owners may not have any interest in games that can’t be monetised long-term. If you’re a big Sims 4 or Madden NFL player, already disappointed in the state of those games with their microtransactions… at the very least, things aren’t gonna get better on that front. But my question is more fundamental: should we be buying these games at all, given who is about to take full ownership of EA?

Promo screenshot for one of The Sims 4's many expansion packs. — One of *many* expansion packs for *The Sims 4*.

I can’t speak for you, nor for anyone but myself. We all have the freedom to decide what’s important to us and what isn’t, where our ethical red lines are, and how and where to spend our money. We’re all free to prioritise and determine what matters most. So this piece isn’t supposed to come across like me “demanding” other people change their behavior or stop supporting a certain company. I’m trying to get my thoughts in order, lay out my own “red lines,” and explain why, going forward, I’m not going to buy any more games developed or published by Electronic Arts.

If I couldn’t support Hogwarts Legacy or the Qatar World Cup, how could I, in good conscience, buy from a company owned by Saudi Arabia? How could I give money to an organisation that supports an authoritarian dictatorship where basic human rights are regularly suppressed? And for what… a video game? Even if it was the best video game of all-time… the ethical and moral cost is now too high.

Still frame from the Mass Effect 4 teaser showing Liara's face. — I’m afraid this means no *Mass Effect 4* for me, assuming it actually gets released…

And yes, I concede the point that it isn’t possible to be 100% ethical in a corporate-capitalist system. Saudi oil accounts for a significant portion of what we use here in the UK, British companies export to and work in Saudi Arabia, and the PIF has stakes in many companies and brands that trade here in the UK. It probably isn’t possible to entirely avoid Saudi Arabia and its PIF. But that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t try, if this is something I feel strongly about, and it doesn’t mean I should make it easy for them to grab money out of my wallet.

That means that some games I’ve honestly been looking forward to or just interested in… they’re now off the table. The third and final chapter in Respawn’s Fallen Order trilogy. The next Mass Effect game. Future sports titles in franchises like PGA Tour and EA FC. I’m going to leave them on the shelf and walk away… because it feels like the right thing to do.

Still frame from EA Sports PGA Tour showing a custom character on the golf course. — …and no more golfing.

What’s more, this buyout has opened my eyes to some of my personal blind spots when it comes to the games industry. I was totally unaware that 10% of EA was already owned by Saudi Arabia’s PIF, so… what else have I missed? I spent a bit of time looking into some of the other big investors in the games industry.

BlackRock, a large investment firm tied to things like weapons dealing, is a large investor in both Sony and Microsoft, for example. And much controversy already surrounds TenCent – a Chinese firm which has made major investments in western games companies, including Epic Games, Ubisoft, and Paradox Interactive. The Vanguard Group – a massive investment firm confirmed by the UN to be one of the largest arms suppliers to Israel during the ongoing war in Gaza, as well as purchasing Israeli government bonds – is also a big investor in video games companies, owning parts of Sega, Nvidia, Microsoft, and Meta, to name but a few.

Stock photo of a PlayStation 5 console and controller. — Do you know who all the major investors are in your favourite gaming companies? I don’t.

I think we’re all aware of how corporate capitalism works. But most of the time, we don’t think about it too much. Big companies get richer by the day, and billionaires make more money than they’ll ever be able to use in a thousand lifetimes… but if they make reasonably-priced, decent products… so what, right? We pick and choose what we want and get on with it. Given how completely integrated into the system these corporations are, and how diversified the biggest ones have become, pushing back against all of it seems impossible – because, frankly, it is.

But we can still draw our own red lines, and we can still say “I can’t support this” when a corporation goes too far. In the case of the EA buyout, because the new ownership is so clear-cut… I think it’s worth trying, at least, to take a stand and make my voice heard.

Stock photo of a hand holding an Xbox control pad (black and white). — I think it’s worth *trying* to be as ethical a consumer as possible.

As a final point: any attempt to be an ethical consumer only really matters if it means making a sacrifice. If I announce that I’m never going to play any Madden NFL games, or that I’m going to stage a one-person boycott of Harrods… that’s functionally irrelevant if I had no plans to buy those games or patronise that shop. Avoiding a brand or product that I was never going to be interested in isn’t the point. What makes this meaningful is that I did genuinely want to try the next Mass Effect game, I was interested in the next EA Sports golf game, and – until now, anyway – I’ve been looking forward to the sequel to Jedi: Survivor. Missing out on those experiences wouldn’t have been my first choice – but because of EA’s new ownership, I feel I have to take action.

And in this late-stage capitalist system, pretty much the only freedom we have, as consumers, is how we spend our money. I can’t guarantee that I’ll never fund Saudi Arabia’s PIF – they have so many investments in so many places, and as evidenced by my ignorance of their earlier investment in Electronic Arts, I’m not even aware of many of these. But when this is clear-cut and obvious, I can choose to draw my own line in the sand and say that I can’t support this company and its holding in the video game space.

Screenshot of Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order showing Cal wearing a pink poncho and holding an orange double-ended lightsaber. — The third game in the *Fallen Order* series is another I won’t be buying in future.

I’m not saying I’m “boycotting” EA, nor am I encouraging you or anyone else to do the same. It won’t make a difference to Electronic Arts or the PIF at the end of the day anyway; I’m just one person, and the lost sales on a handful of games over the next few years won’t make a dent in the bottom line. But it isn’t about “ruining” EA and the PIF, or trying to cause the PIF’s big investment in Electronic Arts to lose value. This is for me: I’m making a determination about what I can and can’t support or endorse when it comes to spending my money. This is an attempt to be an ethical consumer; to ensure that I’m not openly and in full knowledge supporting a corporate entity that funds a government so diametrically opposed to my own personal values on important things like women’s rights, LGBT+ rights, and human rights in general.

So that’s all for today, I guess. If you were looking forward to my coverage of the next Mass Effect game… sorry, but I don’t think I can, in good conscience, support it any longer. Likewise for the Jedi: Survivor sequel. That’s a shame – but that’s the price of trying to be an ethical consumer. I won’t always get it right, I have a lot of blind spots that I need to work on, and frankly, none of us have time to meticulously research every company and all of its investors to make sure we aren’t giving money to those we wouldn’t want to support. But when a case is as clear-cut as this… I think it’s important to speak out, and to vote with my wallet.

All titles discussed above are the copyrights of their respective developer, studio, and/or publisher. The buyout of Electronic Arts is expected to conclude by early 2027. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

The Mass Effect TV Series Has Been Announced (Again)

Thu 14.11.24Dennis

Spoiler Warning: Beware of spoilers for the Mass Effect trilogy.

I think it was back in 2020 or 2021 when I first covered the news that Amazon’s television studio had picked up the rights to Mass Effect. Since then we’ve heard next to nothing about the project, even as the triolgy’s Legendary Edition came and went, and I kind of assumed that it was either stuck in development hell or that Amazon’s executives had passed on whatever had been pitched. Not so, it seems!

Although details are still pretty sparse, we’ve recently heard from Amazon and game developer BioWare that the Mass Effect TV series is still happening, so today I wanted to talk a little about it and consider what the show might eventually look like. We’re going to talk spoilers for all three mainline Mass Effect games, so if you haven’t played the trilogy and want to go into it un-spoiled, this is your last chance to jump ship!

Screenshot of Mass Effect 2 showing Commander Shepard jumping aboard the Normandy. — Jumping ship… get it?

A couple of caveats before we get started. Firstly, I have no “insider information” from BioWare, Amazon, or any of the other studios that may or may not be attached to this project. I’m speculating based on publicly available information and sharing my own thoughts and opinions on the potential series – which may never even see the light of day given how early in its pre-production it seems to be!

Secondly, this is just the subjective opinion of one Mass Effect fan. If you don’t agree with my take on where the TV series could or might go, or if I ignore some aspect of the games that seems important to you… that’s okay! There ought to be enough room in the Mass Effect fan community for differences of opinion and polite discussion. Nothing we’re going to talk about today is in any way official or confirmed in any case.

With all of that out of the way, let’s talk about what a Mass Effect television series could look like.

Concept art from Mass Effect 1. — Concept art of the main characters from *Mass Effect 1*.

The first thing to say is this: Amazon has a crap ton of money! And as we’ve seen from the corporation’s investment in titles like The Expanse, Fallout, The Boys, and The Rings of Power… Amazon doesn’t mind splashing the cash when it comes to making scripted TV shows. On the surface, this bodes well for a Mass Effect series, as Amazon has the resources to give the show a decently high budget.

This matters because creating a sci-fi galaxy from scratch is going to be expensive. Sets will have to be built for spaceships, location shoots will be necessary to capture the look and feel of visiting wildly different planets, and the combination of practical and digital effects necessary to create some of Mass Effect’s non-humanoid aliens will take a lot of time and money.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing the Silversun Strip from the Citadel DLC. — Part of the Citadel – the capital of the Mass Effect galaxy.

On that last point, one of the things I like about the Mass Effect games is how they introduce several very “alien-feeling” alien races. The likes of the Krogan, Hanar, and Volus all feel much less human and much more extraterrestrial than many races from comparable sci-fi stories. BioWare was initially able to create these non-humanoid aliens because the world of Mass Effect was created for a video game; there were no constraints in terms of prosthetics or make-up that have forced the likes of Star Trek and Star Wars to rely primarily on humanoid life-forms.

Transitioning some of these races to the small screen will be a challenge, but it’s one that should be surmountable. I’d love to see a combination of practical special effects and prosthetic makeup with CGI, instead of relying entirely on animation to breathe life into the likes of the Krogan and Turians. In recent years we’ve seen this from other sci-fi franchises like Star Trek, so I really think it’s achievable to use a combination of puppets, prosthetics, and practical special effects alongside CGI.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 1 showing a Hanar character. — Bringing non-humanoid races like the Hanar to the small screen may prove challenging!

I don’t want to get into the minutia of things like filming locations or casting; there’s plenty of time to think about who should play some of the franchise’s iconic roles! It would be great if the likes of Jennifer Hale and Mark Meer could be involved in some way – the duo voiced the female and male versions of Commander Shepard respectively, and could at the very least be offered cameo roles in the show.

But that leads into my next point: is this (and should this be) a direct adaptation of the story of the Mass Effect games?

Concept art for Mass Effect 1 showing several characters in a sci-fi city. — Concept art for *Mass Effect 1*.

My inclination at this stage is that re-telling the Mass Effect story in a new format is a great idea, so I’d be happy to see the trilogy’s story adapted as a TV show. I think it’s a strong story with a great cast of characters, and while it would be an adjustment to get used to some different portrayals in those key roles… I think the story of the Mass Effect trilogy offers the show the best chance of success when compared to trying to tell a brand-new story set in the same world.

We have a couple of examples to point to. The TV adaptation of The Last of Us was a more or less straight adaptation of the video game it was based on. The Halo TV series took the barest bones of the Halo story but made significant changes. One was critically and commercially successful, the other was recently cancelled after just two seasons. There are counter-examples: Amazon’s own Fallout adaptation is a new story set in the same world, for example. But for my money, the story of the Mass Effect trilogy was so strong, so powerful, and such a singular event in its setting that trying to re-make it from the ground up or stepping away from it to do something completely different just doesn’t seem like a good idea. Why go to all the trouble of licensing a successful story if you aren’t going to adapt that story, after all?

Still frame from Halo Season 2 showing the Fall of Reach. — The Fall of Reach played out very differently in the *Halo* TV series compared to the games.

Is it possible that a Mass Effect TV show will start somewhere else, like humanity’s first encounter with a Mass Relay or the war between humans and Turians? Sure. It’s possible. But would that be the strongest foundation to take this rich and wonderful sci-fi universe to a new audience and a new medium? I’m not convinced – and I think the struggles of the likes of not only the Halo series but also Amazon’s The Rings of Power (which has diverged from its source material in a way that has upset some fans of Tolkien’s Middle-earth) show the pitfalls in that approach.

Every writer and producer wants to put their own unique stamp on the projects they work on – and I get that. But when you’re taking a successful, much-loved story and adapting it, fans have certain expectations for what they want to see. I’m sure there are some Mass Effect fans who’d love to see a story about humanity’s first forays into space or how humans came to be accepted by the other Citadel races. But I’m not sure that such a story would be strong enough to carry Mass Effect to a wider audience – and when there’s a fantastic, deep, and emotional story populated by a stellar cast of characters just sitting there, it almost seems like malpractice to ignore it or make radical changes to it.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Shepard and Javik. — Commander Shepard with Javik in *Mass Effect 3*.

If we assume, then, that the Mass Effect TV series will be a straight adaptation of the original Mass Effect trilogy, that raises some questions of its own! Firstly, a big part of the Mass Effect games – the first two, anyway – was that players had a lot of freedom to make narrative-altering choices. In the first game, for example, whole companions could be ignored and never recruited, and in Mass Effect 2 practically everyone on Shepard’s squad could die in the game’s climactic final act. Mass Effect 3 arguably failed to do enough to give many of these choices the impact they should’ve had, but even in that game there were hugely consequential choices that players could make.

So if the Mass Effect TV show is going to adapt the story of the Mass Effect trilogy, here’s my question: which story, exactly? There are dozens of inflection points in the games, places where the story can branch in different directions. Helping one character could lead to conflict with another, main characters can die, new characters can appear to take over their roles, and even Shepard can be a radically different person depending on the choices players make. No TV show could reasonably take into account all of these choices – producers would have to pick one route through the story and follow it to its conclusion.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 2 showing Tali pointing a weapon at Legion. — All three games have moments where players have to make decisions.

It seems pretty obvious to me that for the TV series to be entertaining, Shepard will have to mostly fall on the paragon side of things. Nuanced and complex characters are great, and there’s still scope for a paragon Shepard to make renegade-leaning decisions from time to time. But setting up the character to be quick to anger, rude, and excessively violent… it would make Shepard into a difficult protagonist to root for. So a paragon Shepard who occasionally makes renegade decisions seems like the least-bad option here.

But would Commander Shepard be a man or woman? When writing about Mass Effect I usually use “they/them” when referring to Shepard; the character can be male or female depending on the player’s choice. Given that a Mass Effect TV series would only have room for one Commander Shepard, a decision will have to be taken as to which option to go with. And no, I don’t think a non-binary or genderfluid Shepard is on the cards… as much as some people might want that!

Concept art for Mass Effect 3 showing two different versions of Commander Shepard. — Should the Mass Effect TV show cast a male or female performer as Commander Shepard?

I genuinely don’t know which way the show’s writers and producers would go. There are pros and cons whichever way you look at it, and I can see the casting choice for Commander Shepard being controversial no matter how it’s handled. I don’t think it would really be possible to split the role in two, either – having twin Shepards (like the Ryder twins from Andromeda) or even giving Shepard a second-in-command. A huge part of what made Mass Effect work was Commander Shepard, so if the TV show adapts this story, getting the right performer in the lead role will be incredibly important.

Unfortunately, I see this as a likely point of contention. If Commander Shepard is cast as a woman or person of colour, I can see the “anti-woke” crowd attacking the series and trying to get it cancelled before a single episode has aired. Look at the reaction to “black dwarves” in The Rings of Power or the triggering power the mere presence of a non-binary character had in Dragon Age: The Veilguard. It’s a shame that discussion of media and entertainment online so quickly descends into these dark places… but it’s something that the producers of the Mass Effect TV show will have to contend with one way or another. The original games featured a pretty diverse cast, but cries of race- or gender-bending will be hurled at the series if any of these characters’ fundamentals are altered.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Shepard in the Normandy's cockpit. — Commander Shepard on the bridge of *her* ship.

I think most fans would accept a female Commander Shepard. Female-led shows and films from Alien and Star Trek: Voyager to Fallout and Everything Everywhere All At Once have been well-received, and with “femShep” having been a part of Mass Effect since the beginning, critics would really have very little to complain about. Adding a new female-led sci-fi show to the lineup would, in my view, be a positive thing. The casting needs to be right first and foremost, and I’m not saying Mass Effect needs a woman in its lead role. But why not? It could be great to see a female Commander Shepard taking the fight to the Reapers!

Let’s try to set that aside for now! I hope that whoever is cast in the lead role will do a great job, and will end up making any criticisms from the “anti-woke” crowd seem even sillier than usual.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Shepard crouching behind a wall. — A male Commander Shepard taking cover.

I’d like to talk next about the potential structure of a Mass Effect television series – because there really are interesting ways to adapt the games’ side-missions and secondary storylines.

One thing I love about television compared to film is how much more time there is to spend with characters, and how much richer and deeper their stories can be as a result. The same is true of video games, and the Mass Effect trilogy is a fantastic example of interactive storytelling. Characters grow and change over the course of their adventures, and the bonds between them strengthen as they get to know and trust each other. There are themes of bridging racial and social divides that could be incredibly relevant, and character arcs and pairings that are just beautiful to watch unfold. All of these things could – and should – be part of a Mass Effect TV series, as its the characters that make the story into something special.

Concept art for Mass Effect 2 showing the main companions. — Most of the main companions from *Mass Effect 2*.

As someone who loved shows like Star Trek: The Next Generation, Space Precinct, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer in the ’90s, believe me when I say that I love episodic storytelling. Any Mass Effect TV series would be a wholly serialised affair, in the mold of recent hits like Game of Thrones. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t room for some degree of episodic storytelling – and that’s where the aforementioned side-missions and quests come in.

Again, for the purposes of this argument we’re assuming that the TV show will be based on the original Mass Effect trilogy. Those games all had side-quests, lower-priority missions, and storylines focusing on individual companion characters. It would be tempting for a serialised show to skip all of that and focus on Shepard and the Reapers… but I think that would be a mistake. Not only do these missions have some of the best storytelling and most emotional moments in the entire series, but they add so much to the world of Mass Effect and to Shepard as a leader.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing the SSV Normandy taking off from a planet. — The Normandy.

There are ways to mix episodic storytelling with multi-season narrative arcs. Look at Star Trek: Strange New Worlds as a great example of this; the show follows its characters as they take part in a wide range of missions and stories, but they retain their growth and development from one episode to the next, even when those episodes are completely different in story, structure, and tone. There are season-long storylines running in the background, too, even when the focus of one episode is mostly elsewhere.

In short, a Mass Effect TV show wouldn’t need to skip over the likes of the Rogue VI mission from Mass Effect 1, or the character loyalty missions from Mass Effect 2 – these could be integral parts of the show, while also breaking up the main plot to take Shepard and their companions to different places. Some of the side-missions cement Shepard’s relationships with characters who will be among their closest friends for the entire story, and without including missions like “Find Dr Saleon” or “Family Armor” from Mass Effect 1 Shepard’s relationships with Garrus and Wrex might feel… less impactful.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Garrus on the Citadel. — Garrus Vakarian: Shepard’s BFF.

I’m not saying that the Mass Effect TV show should recreate every single side-mission. But there’s something to be said for a series that doesn’t always do the same thing, and changes in style, tone, and which characters are in focus can break things up and make for a more interesting presentation. Not only that, but some of the missions that are nominally optional in the games can have a big impact on other storylines.

Take the “Rogue VI” mission from Mass Effect 1 as an example. I hated playing through this; it’s a boring slog of a mission which involves using the Mako (barf) to visit four identical outposts at which Shepard and co. have to fight through generic enemies and push a button to shut down an advanced computer that’s gotten out of control. But you later learn, in Mass Effect 3, that the out-of-control VI was the source of EDI’s programming and personality – completely reframing the mission and tying it into one of the game’s main characters. It was a great bit of storytelling that made re-playing an otherwise bland side-mission feel a lot better on repeat playthroughs.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 1 showing the Mako on Luna. — The “Rogue VI” mission.

There are also some great moments of characterisation in the Mass Effect 2 loyalty missions. Jack uncovers the truth behind her shocking childhood at the facility she escaped from. Jacob reunites with his estranged father – but in the worst possible way. And Shepard ends up in serious danger while helping Samara track down her daugher… who’s a serial killer. These missions vary in terms of location, but they also vary wildly in tone, with some being light-hearted and even fun while others are intense and violent. There’s a lot to be said for finding ways to include as many as possible.

According to the website HowLongToBeat, playthroughs of the Mass Effect trilogy can take anywhere from 60-140 hours. This varies a lot depending on things like the difficulty setting and how much of the side-content players engage with. My own estimate would be somewhere around 90 hours; that’s how long my most recent playthrough of the trilogy took. So this is a long story – and one that’s going to take multiple seasons of television in order to tell.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 1 showing the Council. — The Citadel Council.

There are things from the games that can be cut out. Some levels are deliberately padded out with generic enemies to stomp just to give the player something to do; a mission that might’ve taken an hour to play doesn’t necessarily need to be an entire episode of TV on its own. But we’re still talking about a show that would need to be at least five seasons – assuming eight to ten episodes per season, as is common nowadays. I don’t think three seasons (one per game) would be enough to really get to grips with how deep the world of Mass Effect really is, especially when you consider that a new audience is going to need an introduction to this brand-new universe.

In 2012, Mass Effect 3 came in for a lot of criticism, particularly of its ending. I wasn’t wild about the “pick a colour” ending, but I felt that wasn’t actually the worst part. Where I felt most let down by the game was how different choices – or combinations of multiple choices across the trilogy – just didn’t seem to matter and weren’t even mentioned as the story reached its crescendo. The example I’ve given before is this: through careful choices across all three games, it’s possible at a crucial moment in Mass Effect 3 to save the Quarians and Geth when it looks like it should only be possible to save one. This is not easy to pull off… but after the mission is over, there’s basically no impact at all apart from a few static images in the war assets menu.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing a Mass Relay detonating. — The final third of *Mass Effect 3* needed work.

Long story short, I think a Mass Effect television series could do more with some of these storylines than the games did – and by choosing a single outcome to include in the series, there’d be more freedom to tailor the story to fit. If the TV show kills off Wrex, for instance, there’d be no need to have Urdnot Wreav behave quite the same as he does in the games where he’s basically a stand-in for the missing Wrex; he could be his own character. And much more could be made of the Quarians and Geth coming together to achieve peace. By cutting out different narrative outcomes, we could get a much more detailed look at some of the choices that I felt weren’t properly acknowledged in the original games.

Finally, there’s the elephant in the room: Mass Effect 4… or whatever we’re calling the next game in the series. At time of writing, BioWare is working on a new Mass Effect game, and based on the very brief tease that was shown off a couple of years ago, it will feature at least one main character from the original trilogy. Would BioWare, EA, and Amazon want to create a TV show that’s based on or directly connected to the new game? Given how early in development both projects are, could there be an attempt to get them to release at more or less the same time?

Graphic based on the Mass Effect teaser trailer showing a mock-up of a Mass Effect 4 box. — Will the TV show tie in with *Mass Effect 4* in some way?

If so, does that mean that a re-telling of the original trilogy is off the cards? While I can understand the temptation of making a game and TV show that are connected, I wonder if that’s the right approach. If Mass Effect 4 is going to be a direct sequel to the original trilogy, not a spin-off or prequel, having the TV show re-tell that story could actually work really well. It could give fans who might be turned off by playing older games an easy route into the story just in time to pick up the newest entry in the series.

Of course, that might not be the route BioWare and Amazon want to go down. And there are points in favour of setting the TV series in the same timeline as the new game. Doing so could draw a line under the original Mass Effect story, setting the stage for something brand-new. The concern I’ll have, if that’s the way things go, is whether the new story will be as good as the original one, or whether this iteration of Mass Effect can live up to what came before.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Shepard opening a door. — Hacking a locked door.

So I think that’s everything I had in my notes. It goes without saying that the Mass Effect television series is several years away at least – and that it could be delayed again or even cancelled outright. The show seems to be in a very early stage of development, and while I welcome Amazon’s re-commitment to it, until we get more concrete information, part of me will remain sceptical about whether I’ll ever get to see it! I’m not getting any younger (or healthier) after all!

The Mass Effect games built up a rich, detailed, lived-in world that feels ripe for exploration in a different way. As much fun as it was to play through those games, I’m genuinely thrilled at the prospect of being able to enjoy the story all over again in a different way. It won’t be the same – and it will be an adjustment getting used to different performers in key roles and perhaps slightly different designs and aesthetic choices. But I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to call Mass Effect one of my favourite sci-fi stories… ever. If and when it makes it to the small screen, I’m really hopeful that it will be an exciting and enjoyable ride.

Screenshot of Mass Effect 3 showing Shepard speaking with Mordin via a holo-communicator. — Here’s hoping we’ll get an excellent adaptaion!

I hope this has been interesting. I know we got into wildly speculative territory, but there was a surprising amount to say about a TV series that’s still in early production! I could be wrong about re-telling the story of the original games, and I’ll try not to be too disappointed if the show ultimately tells a story that ties in with Mass Effect 4 or shoots off to the Andromeda galaxy!

I haven’t played Mass Effect in a while, so maybe it’s time to re-install Legendary Edition and go round again!

The Mass Effect video games – including Legendary Edition – are the copyright of BioWare and Electronic Arts. The Mass Effect television series (currently untitled) may be the copyright of Amazon Studios, Amazon Prime Video, and/or Electronic Arts. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Questions that Mass Effect 4 will almost certainly need to answer

Mon 25.09.23Mon 25.09.23Dennis

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the Mass Effect trilogy (including Legendary Edition).

It’s been a while since we last talked about the next entry in the Mass Effect series, but to celebrate my dedicated Mass Effect webpage finally going live here on the website, I thought it could be interesting to consider a handful of big questions that the team at BioWare will need to answer before a new story can be written. If you missed it, I now have a brand-new webpage dedicated to the Mass Effect series, and you can find all of my Mass Effect commentary, theories, and articles there. You can find this page by using the drop-down menu at the top of every page or post here on the website – or you can click or tap here to head there directly!

There hasn’t been much by way of news about the next Mass Effect game for a couple of years. BioWare released a brief CGI teaser all the way back in December 2020 confirming that the game is in pre-production, but since then, updates have been few and far between. BioWare provided a brief update in November 2022, saying that pre-production is “proceeding very well,” which sounded positive. In August 2023, however, BioWare announced that there were going to be job losses at the company. With production currently focused on Dragon Age: Dreadwolf, and with these cuts taking place, the next Mass Effect game is unlikely to see the light of day before 2026 or 2027 at the earliest.

Commander Shepard in the Normandy’s cockpit.

But that doesn’t mean there aren’t things to talk about! We may not see the game I’m tentatively calling Mass Effect 4 for a long time, but the studio will have already taken a number of big decisions about the game, its setting, its characters, and its key storylines. Today, I’m giving my two cents on what some of those decisions may be – and there are some absolutely massive ones that have serious implications for the state of the Mass Effect galaxy.

As I’ve said before, there are questions about the Mass Effect galaxy that BioWare simply can’t ignore forever. Maybe a single game with a focused story could sidestep one or two of these questions, but if Mass Effect is to survive long-term with new games (and perhaps even a TV series) being produced… sooner or later answers will have to come. What that means is that some of the biggest decisions open to players in the original Mass Effect trilogy will need to be given a canon outcome, one that Mass Effect 4 can build upon. To players who were adamantly opposed to playing the game a certain way, that could lead to hurt feelings and disappointment – but I see no way around it. Some of these points are too big, and the implications too diverse, for a new story to be written that could take so many different outcomes into account.

Bypassing a locked door in *Mass Effect 3*.

Some Commander Shepards died at the end of Mass Effect 2. That game’s suicide mission could, under the right (or should that be wrong?) circumstances lead to Shepard’s death, and that meant that players had to either restart from an earlier save or start a new campaign in order to play Mass Effect 3. The third entry in the trilogy was able to take into account a lot of decisions from earlier games – but Shepard’s death was a bridge too far.

I bring this up because the Mass Effect series has taken big decisions like this in the past. Mass Effect 3 couldn’t happen without Shepard being alive, meaning players whose characters died at the end of Mass Effect 2 didn’t get to see their decisions carried forward. The same will have to happen in Mass Effect 4 – albeit on a grander scale.

So let’s try to look ahead to Mass Effect 4, and – assuming the game will be the sequel we’re all hoping for – pick out some of the biggest questions that will need to be answered.

Question #1:
What colour were the explosions?

This is a deliberately facetious way of asking the biggest question that any sequel to Mass Effect 3 cannot ignore: which ending was chosen? It simply isn’t going to be possible for the game to try to account for all three possibilities; the differences between them are too vast for a single story to encompass wildly divergent states of the galaxy. So one ending will have to be declared “official” – and if I had to place a bet, I’d say that the “destroy” ending is going to be the one that’s picked.

All of the endings of Mass Effect 3 have points in their favour from a narrative standpoint, but “destroy” was the one that Shepard had been working towards across the entire trilogy. Not only that, but it’s the only ending in which it’s even remotely possible – based on what we saw on screen – that Shepard could have survived. “Destroy” is, according to stats about Mass Effect: Legendary Edition that were released by BioWare, also the most popular choice that players made. So there are a lot of points in favour of making “destroy” the canonical ending to Mass Effect 3.

The state of the galaxy is going to be profoundly altered by whichever ending to Mass Effect 3 was chosen, and I just don’t see how a new game could possibly take that diversity and variety into account. Mass Effect 4 would essentially need to be three games in one in order to accomplish that – and that just doesn’t seem likely. If Mass Effect 4 is to continue the series, perhaps laying the groundwork for a new trilogy or series of games, that divergence will only grow over the course of its story. So there has to be a single starting point chosen – even if that means disappointing some players who were particularly attached to one of the other ending variants.

I felt that Mass Effect 3′s final chapter was trying to present “synthesis” as the better option. That was the one that was hardest to unlock, and in the epilogue, EDI seems to suggest that “synthesis” led to a kind of technological paradise, with the galaxy’s races living in harmony… but I always took umbrage with that idea. Not only was it literally the goal of the Reapers as stated by the AI that controls them, it was a completely different outcome to what Shepard had been fighting for. It was also not Shepard’s place to inflict such a radical change on the entire galaxy without anyone’s consent – and without even listening to a single other opinion on the matter! But more than that, “synthesis” doesn’t seem like it would lead to an interesting or relatable narrative. With human characters merged with AI, and with everyone living in a utopia… how could we as the audience get invested in the people or the world?

Question #2:
Did Shepard side with the Geth or the Quarians – or find a route to make peace?

Tali, Shepard, and Legion in *Mass Effect 2*.

The Geth-Quarian conflict was one of the most interesting in Mass Effect, and the way in which it came to a head in the final chapter was incredible. It was disappointing, however, that after the mission to Rannoch, the Geth and Quarians weren’t really mentioned much, and that all of the hard work involved in getting one or both of them to join the war effort was relegated to a couple of JPEG images in the war assets menu! But enough about the rushed end to Mass Effect 3!

There are galactic repercussions that will reverberate from the Geth-Quarian conflict, and how it was resolved will have a huge impact on the state of the galaxy in Mass Effect 4. If Shepard chose to side with the Geth, then chose the “destroy” ending… both races could be extinct. Or if Shepard found the pathway to peace and then chose either “synthesis” or “control,” both races could still be around and working together. Whichever outcome it is, whether the Geth, Quarians, or both are present in the galaxy is going to be a big deal.

Quarians in the *Mass Effect 3* epilogue.

Here’s my pet theory: one way or another, BioWare will include both the Geth and Quarians in Mass Effect 4 – even if that means ignoring one of the consequences of the “destroy” ending. Depending on how much time may have passed in-universe, the new game could claim that the Quarians rebuilt the Geth after they were destroyed – or perhaps the Catalyst either lied about the Crucible destroying all synthetic life or simply got it wrong.

I think that given the popularity of both the Quarians and Geth – thanks in large part to their squadmate representatives, Tali and Legion – BioWare won’t want to throw either away. If we stick to a literal interpretation of the Catalyst’s warning in Mass Effect 3 and assume that “destroy” will be chosen as the canon ending, then perhaps the Geth will be absent. But I wouldn’t bet on that, and I think a technobabble explanation for their survival or resurrection is plausible and could be made to fit.

Question #3:
Did Shepard survive?

Does this moment represent Shepard’s survival?

This is the big one! While not as galaxy-altering as the way in which the Crucible was used or the literal survival of entire races… from a character point of view, Commander Shepard is the player’s avatar in the Mass Effect world. If there’s even a slim chance that they might’ve survived, at the very least we should find out!

I can’t decide right now whether Mass Effect 4 will go down the route of making Shepard the player character once again. After the disappointment of Andromeda, there will surely be a temptation to “stick with what works” in the Mass Effect universe – and Shepard is clearly a big part of that. That being said, I think there’s absolutely scope to create a new player character and to expand Mass Effect beyond Shepard and the crew of the Normandy. If the franchise is to continue long-term, that will have to happen sooner or later.

A male Commander Shepard aboard the Normandy.

But regardless, news of Shepard’s fate should reach us at some point during the game – even if it’s only to confirm that they died centuries earlier. One thing that a lot of folks found frustrating about Andromeda was that the outcome of the Reaper War was left entirely unresolved, and I don’t think that the next Mass Effect game could get away with repeating that mistake.

After everything Shepard went through to defeat the Reapers, they have definitely earned their retirement! But if the galaxy is in danger once more – and surely, somehow, it will be – they could be the person that has to step up once again and lead a new fight.

Question #4:
What became of the Rachni?

The Rachni in one possible epilogue scene.

Depending on choices made in both Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 3, it’s possible that the Rachni may have survived. The Rachni were an insectoid race that threatened to overwhelm the galaxy centuries before the events of the games – and were believed to be extinct. Shepard was given the option to save the last known Rachni queen on two occasions – and the presence or absence of the Rachni could have wider implications for the state of the galaxy.

If the Rachni queen was saved, Rachni workers join up with Admiral Hackett’s fleet and contribute to the Crucible project. Given the scale of the Crucible, I don’t think the Rachni’s survival could be hidden in the aftermath of the war, so any hope for a return to hiding away on an obscure planet seems to be out of the question.

But not everyone would be thrilled about the Rachni’s return. The Krogan still view the Rachni as a kind of ancient ancestral enemy, and there may be Krogan and Asari who still remember the aftermath of the Rachni Wars. Even if the Rachni’s contribution to the success of the Crucible was public knowledge, there are many in the galaxy who would be wary – and some who might view them as a threat. Could an attack on the Rachni be the first sign of the Reaper War alliances breaking down?

Alternatively, it’s possible that the Rachni were never saved by Shepard and thus went extinct with the defeat of the Reapers. This would preclude their presence in the story as either a friend or foe – unless they could be revived, once again, by technobabble!

Question #5:
Did the Leviathans join the war effort?

The Leviathans were eventually tracked to their base.

Another pet theory of mine is that the Leviathans – who were originally DLC for Mass Effect 3 – will return as the “big bad” in a new story, seeking to reclaim a galaxy that they view as “theirs.” You can read more on that by clicking or tapping here, by the way. But for our purposes today, the question is whether they joined the war at all – or whether they were able to remain hidden.

Following the Leviathan story to its conclusion is not an essential part of Mass Effect 3, but it’s one that has far-reaching implications. The discovery of the Leviathans explains the origin of the Reapers, but it also introduces us to a very alien race – one that ruled the galaxy and enthralled other races aeons ago. Despite their defeat at the hands of the Reapers and the passage of tens of millions of years, the Leviathans seem to have lost none of their arrogant sense of superiority – so how they could possibly be integrated into a multi-racial galaxy is an open question.

Commander Shepard inspecting a Leviathan cave painting.

Regardless of whether they end up as the new game’s villains, though, I don’t think Mass Effect 4 could just ignore the Leviathans. Their numbers may be small, but with the Reaper threat gone it’s not inconceivable that the Leviathans would want to expand, leaving behind their watery planet. The consequences of this for the rest of the galaxy could be extreme – or not! But either way, the Leviathans will be a presence.

Players will want to know what happened after the Reaper War – and realistically Mass Effect 4 will have to at least pay lip service to all of the races and factions that were involved, telling us what became of them… or where they were last spotted. The Leviathans also have a lot to answer for, in a way, as the original creators of the Reapers!

Question #6:
Which of Shepard’s companions survived?

Concept art featuring Shepard’s crew from *Mass Effect 2*.

Across the Mass Effect trilogy, Shepard teamed up with nineteen main crewmates – and there were also a handful of others who served in that role on a temporary basis. Even if Mass Effect 4 doesn’t feature all of them, it would still be nice to get news of their fates. During the final battle of the Reaper War, it’s possible that not all of them would have survived, and Shepard had the opportunity to say goodbye to many of them before the final act of Mass Effect 3 got underway.

As of right now, we can safely assume that Liara survived! She was shown in the CGI teaser for Mass Effect 4 back in 2020, so it seems all but certain that she’ll make an appearance – somehow – in the new game. That doesn’t mean she’ll be a squadmate or playable character, but she could play a significant role. She could even be a kind of narrator for the game.

Liara as glimpsed in the 2020 teaser trailer.

Characters who were aboard the Normandy at the end of Mass Effect 3 seem to survive the end of the game – or at least most of them do, depending on the choices players made and how strong their war assets were going into the final clash. We can safely assume that the likes of Joker, Garrus, and Javik survived the immediate aftermath of the war, at least.

But that still leaves us with most of the folks from Mass Effect 2 – characters like Miranda, Samara, and Jack. All of them could have died before the endgame, but assuming they were alive going into the final fight… we don’t know what happened to them. If Mass Effect 4 is set many years later, discovering their fates could be spread across the game, and players could learn what happened to them without necessarily having them all make an appearance.

Question #7:
Was the Genophage cured?

A vision of Tuchanka if the Genophage cure was sabotaged.

Commander Shepard has the opportunity in Mass Effect 3 to cure the Genophage – or sabotage the cure. The Genophage was an artificial sterility plague that had been inflicted upon the Krogan by the Turians and Salarians, and there will be galactic-scale consequences depending on Shepard’s actions here.

One day we’ll have to talk about this storyline in more detail – because I find it one of the most interesting and morally dubious storylines in the entire Mass Effect trilogy! But for today, suffice to say that curing the Genophage, or refusing to cure it, will have major ramifications for the whole galaxy.

Happy Krogan families – if the Genophage was cured.

If the Genophage was cured, there will be a lot more Krogan around – but they should be friendly, right? I mean, Shepard cured the Krogan people, and if Wrex and Eve survived to lead the Krogan, that knowledge will be passed down and celebrated. But there are some potential issues here! Even Wrex seemed to suggest that Krogan expansion was on the agenda – and centuries ago, Krogan expansionism led to war.

On the other hand, if the Genophage cure was sabotaged, the remaining Krogan will likely feel betrayed and could launch a new rebellion. At the very least, Krogan will be hostile and unfriendly if the Genophage wasn’t cured. Having spent a lot of time with Krogan characters across the trilogy, I think it would be hard to pull off turning them into villains next time around, even if there’s a narrative pathway that makes sense in-universe. But a story could be crafted in which, no matter what decision Shepard made, the cure was ultimately sabotaged and doomed to failure.

Question #8:
Who gets to be on the Council?

More broadly, we can even ask whether there’s a Council at all in the aftermath of the Reaper War – but somehow, I suspect there will be. In the Mass Effect trilogy, humanity’s rapid ascent from newly-encountered species to full Council membership was a contentious issue with some of the other races, and after everything that happened with the Reapers, a shake-up of the galactic order could be on the agenda.

From our own history, we can point to how World War II led to the creation of the United Nations, and how the pre-war order was transformed in the aftermath of the conflict. Something similar could happen in the Mass Effect galaxy, with races like the Krogan, Quarians, Batarians, or even the Rachni and Geth all being potential members of a broader, more diverse and democratic Council.

A Vorcha, Salarian, and Volus served on the Council… in the movie *Blasto*!

If several races were invited to join, those who were snubbed might feel particularly stung! And others, like the Leviathans, for example, may not wish to join a power-sharing arrangement – they might prefer to seek conquest and total power for themselves. But there are many who’d happily join the Council.

The pre-war order of the Salarians, Turians, and Asari being the dominant forces in galactic politics could be at an end – but will they be okay with that? Will the Salarians genuinely listen to Krogan input, and will the Asari really be willing to see the Quarians as equals? Will there be arguments about how to direct the resources necessary to rebuild? There could be a lot of points of tension!

So that’s it!

We’ve looked at a few questions that the next Mass Effect game – or a future sequel to Mass Effect 3 if that game turns out to be something different – will have to address. Some of these points could be bigger and more important than others depending on what kind of story the new game aims to tell, but sooner or later there are big questions about the state of the galaxy that will have to be tackled.

Andromeda tried to sidestep these questions and do its own thing – which was probably not a bad idea in 2017, coming so soon after the trilogy had wrapped up. But there were other problems with Andromeda that meant the game didn’t stick the landing – and when it was already feeling like an overblown side-quest, some fans were left disappointed when it didn’t address any of the big questions facing the Mass Effect galaxy.

There’s an opportunity for the next game in the series to not only answer some of these big questions, but to use the answers to set the stage for a brand-new adventure. Taking what happened with the Leviathans, for example, and expanding on that story to create a new villain is one possibility that I think is worth keeping an eye on!

So I hope this has been a bit of fun, or at least interesting. There are definitely other story points that a new game could address that I didn’t include here; it’s by no means an exhaustive list. And we may return to some of these questions and ideas in the future to talk more about them or give them a longer write-up. I had fun thinking about where the next Mass Effect game could go, at any rate!

Earlier this summer I replayed the Mass Effect trilogy, and that was part of what prompted me to create a proper webpage for the franchise here on the website. Although I don’t talk about Mass Effect all the time, it’s a series I’ve enjoyed and I am certainly looking forward to seeing what comes next.

Don’t forget to swing by my new Mass Effect webpage. You can find it by clicking or tapping here.

The next Mass Effect game is in early development and most likely won’t be released for several years. Mass Effect: Legendary Edition is out now for PC, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One, and Xbox Series S/X. The Mass Effect series – including all properties mentioned above – is the copyright of BioWare and Electronic Arts. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

The big narrative question facing Mass Effect 4

Wed 15.09.21Fri 15.04.22Dennis

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for the ending of the Mass Effect trilogy, including Mass Effect: Legendary Edition.

Mass Effect 4 has a choice to make – at least it does if, as we’re all assuming, the game is planned as a sequel to the Mass Effect trilogy. The choice the developers will have to make will have knock-on effects for the entire plot of the game, and unfortunately will impact some players more than others. In short, BioWare will need to choose one of Mass Effect 3′s ending options as the foundation on which to build their new story.

We talked a little while ago about the ending options from a narrative point of view, and I came to the cop-out conclusion that all three have points in their favour as well as drawbacks. Though the “destroy” ending is seemingly favoured by a majority of players, there are still sizeable minorities who chose either “synthesis” or “control” at the climax of the story.

Each of the three endings are very different from one another, and each would leave the Mass Effect galaxy in a very different place. I don’t see how it would be possible for BioWare to make one game that allowed players to choose which ending to canonise; the narrative consequences are simply too different in each case to allow a single story, even a very adaptable one, to be created. Unless BioWare is prepared to essentially make three games, trying to incorporate all three endings seems like a non-starter.

There’s also the question of Commander Shepard’s fate. The teaser trailer for the next Mass Effect game that was shown off earlier in the year appeared to show Liara on a quest to either find Shepard or find their remains, and if we can infer from that that Commander Shepard will have some role to play in the game’s story – whether that’s as a playable character or not – then there needs to be some realistic way that Shepard could’ve survived the events of Mass Effect 3. As far as we know based on what we saw in the game, the only way Shepard even possibly survives is to choose the “destroy” ending.

Shepard’s possible survival was teased in *Mass Effect 3*.

Mass Effect 3′s ending – and really the final third of the game – was undeniably rushed, and as a result we only got a very brief epilogue showing off some of the possible consequences for each scenario. But even just in those few minutes of voiceover atop static images, we can tell that the Mass Effect galaxy ends up in a very different place depending on Shepard’s choice.

I’ve always felt that Mass Effect 3 wanted to push players toward the “synthesis” ending. That’s the one that was most difficult to unlock, and if EDI’s epilogue is to be believed it seems to lead to a technological utopia of sorts, with the rebuilding of the galaxy happening much more quickly and easily, and with the possibility of life extension for organic beings.

Turians in the aftermath of the “synthesis” ending.

But paradise doesn’t really make for an interesting story! Not only that, but synthesis was never Shepard’s goal; it was only introduced as an option right at the very end of the game with limited explanation courtesy of the Catalyst. The Catalyst would claim that synthesis – i.e. fusion of organic and synthetic life – had been its end goal since the beginning, which in effect makes it the Reapers’ objective too, as the Catalyst was the force controlling the Reapers. Shepard didn’t get the opportunity to hear anyone else’s perspective on synthesis before making their choice.

Setting aside that making such a monumental decision for every living being is not Shepard’s choice to make, “synthesis” also has some pretty disturbing implications. The way in which newly-synthesised denizens of the galaxy appear to go along with everything that’s happened, combined with the Reapers’ survival and the Catalyst’s comments about this being its own endgame, could be taken to mean that this isn’t really a victory at all for Shepard and their allies.

Did the Reapers win if Shepard chose “synthesis?”

“Control” is likewise not a strong basis for building a new story. With Shepard seizing control of the Reapers and simply directing them to leave the galaxy, the Reaper threat has not ended. Shepard may be in control for now – but how long will that control last? Can Shepard keep the Reapers under their sway indefinitely, or will millennia of isolation drive them mad?

In order for Mass Effect 4 to put the Reaper War in the rear-view mirror and move on to a new story, a decision has to be taken as to which ending is the “official” one. The popularity of “destroy”, combined with the negative consequences present in the “synthesis” and “control” options, seem to make it the only practical choice.

What will the state of the galaxy be by the time of *Mass Effect 4*?

My concern is that Mass Effect 4 might try to tell the same story in all three settings with a few cosmetic differences to pay lip-service to the ending choices but without really exploring in any detail what the consequences of those endings might be. Take, for example, my theory regarding the Leviathans. If BioWare wanted to make the Leviathans the main villain for Mass Effect 4, that only really works with the “destroy” ending. Consider that the Leviathans have remained hidden for millions of years following the Reapers’ first harvest. If a new force (Shepard) seized the Reapers in the “control” ending, from their point of view the Reaper threat still exists. Would they emerge from hiding? And in the case of “synthesis,” the Leviathans would be affected too. It was strongly implied in the “synthesis” epilogue that every species was now working together, so in such a case they couldn’t be villains.

That’s just one hypothetical example of how one story couldn’t be forced into three very different moulds for a new game in the series. We’ve seen smaller-scale examples of this within the Mass Effect trilogy itself, and Mass Effect 3 in particular seemed to have difficulty respecting players’ choices in previous games. To give two examples: regardless of what players did in Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2, Liara will always be the Shadow Broker in Mass Effect 3, and Udina will always be Earth’s Councillor.

Udina is always the Councillor by *Mass Effect 3*, no matter what players choose.

These stories were relatively minor, though, at least in comparison to the things we’re considering today! Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 did respect players’ choices and the consequences of those choices in some ways, though, making each playthrough unique. In fact it’s this aspect of the trilogy that makes it so appealing to me and to many other players – Commander Shepard feels like a different person on each playthrough and the story is tweaked to recognise that.

But the differences in Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 were minor. Certain characters would be missing if they’d died in previous games, for example, but there was usually someone else to take their place. Urdnot Wreav (voiced by Star Trek: The Next Generation’s Michael Dorn) would take Wrex’s place as the clan leader if Wrex died. Ashley and Kaidan were basically interchangeable in Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3. And even characters like Thane, who played an important role in Mass Effect 3 when it came to the Cerberus attack on the Citadel, were replaced by a like-for-like stand-in if they’d died during the suicide mission.

If Wrex died, Wreav takes his place and the story proceeds in a very similar way.

It would be impossible, though, for BioWare to successfully repeat this on a larger scale. The three ending options for Mass Effect 3 simply can’t lead to the same story because of how radically different everything about the galaxy necessarily must be in each scenario. Add into the mix that Mass Effect 4 may be picking up a story some years or even decades after the end of Mass Effect 3 and there’s been time for those changes to multiply. In short: one single story cannot be made to work in all three scenarios, and trying to do so will all but guarantee a disappointing experience for players.

Mass Effect 4 has a difficult task. Whatever BioWare chooses to do with the game’s story, some players who were very attached to the way they played the original trilogy are bound to be left upset. Because those games offered players different routes leading to different endings, there really isn’t any escaping that. The only glimmer of hope is that one ending choice is substantially more popular than others – and BioWare has been keeping tabs on that! The fact that the “synthesis” ending was not a big part of the game at all, only appearing right at the very end, and that “control” had been the preference of Mass Effect 3′s villains also seems to set up a situation in which the choice should be acceptable to a majority of fans of the Mass Effect trilogy. I’d wager that most players chose “destroy” on at least one of their playthroughs anyway.

So that’s it for today. Mass Effect 4 has a choice to make – and it’s a big one. As I see it, any sequel has to choose one ending over the others simply because the state of the galaxy is so radically different in each case that one single story couldn’t possibly fit all three scenarios. Despite my feelings about Mass Effect: Legendary Edition, I’m curious to see what BioWare has in store for the next part of the franchise – even though it’s still a few years away!

Mass Effect 4 theory: Leviathan

Tue 31.08.21Fri 15.04.22Dennis

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers ahead for Mass Effect: Legendary Edition and its ending.

Though the release of the underwhelming Mass Effect: Legendary Edition earlier this year was partly a money-making ploy on the part of BioWare and Electronic Arts, there is another significant factor in the development of what we’ll generously call a “remaster.” Legendary Edition had the task of rehabilitating the series’ reputation following the disappointment of Mass Effect: Andromeda, and was also tasked with bringing in new fans – as well as getting existing fans hyped up – in time for the upcoming release of Mass Effect 4. In that sense, Legendary Edition does seem to have largely succeeded, as excitement for the next entry in the series is higher than it’s ever been.

No details have yet been announced for Mass Effect 4, and we’ve only had the tiniest of teases in the form of a CGI teaser trailer, so any details of the game’s story are complete unknowns. But based on what we know about the Mass Effect galaxy, perhaps it isn’t too early to speculate about what might come next for Commander Shepard and their crew… assuming Shepard is coming back, of course!

One of the key things Mass Effect 4 will have to balance is the scale of its story. Whether we get to play as Shepard or not, Mass Effect 4 will almost certainly be picking up the story in the aftermath of the Reaper War. This conflict saw the whole galaxy – led by Shepard – fighting for its very survival against a seemingly unstoppable foe, so from a narrative point of view that kind of epic tale can be hard to top.

This was the fundamental problem that befell Mass Effect: Andromeda. Even if that game had been launched in a better condition, without the bugs and visual glitches that would go on to define it for many players, the underlying story still felt anticlimactic. I’ve described Andromeda in the past as a game that feels like an overblown side-quest, and partly this is because of the story that came immediately before it. Andromeda was an attempt to branch out, to take Mass Effect away from Commander Shepard and spin it out into a larger franchise. But it failed not because of its bugs and other technical issues – though those were catastrophic in their own right – but because it told a story that many players simply weren’t interested in.

Coming on the heels of the Reaper War, Mass Effect 4 has to avoid feeling anticlimactic in the way Andromeda did. But it has to balance that against telling a story that’s too derivative or repetitive; another galactic-scale threat caused by invaders from beyond the galaxy would feel like a cheap knock-off of what came before. Look to Star Wars’ old Expanded Universe for countless examples of this, as fan-fiction versions of Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia battled clone after clone of Palpatine and fought dozens of bland, derivative Sith Lords and Imperial wannabes.

What comes next for the Mass Effect galaxy has to feel consistent, too, with what we already know about the setting. After Shepard succeeded at uniting the forces of practically every major faction in the galaxy, having one of them turn on the others and become an antagonist wouldn’t only be difficult to pull off narratively, it would risk upsetting fans and coming across as annoying.

The next Mass Effect game has to tell a story that follows on from the Reaper War.

So I think we can rule out stories like a krogan or turian uprising, or the sudden return of the long-dead Protheans looking to conquer the galaxy! Those kinds of stories might seem interesting – and perhaps the game will ultimately try to go down a similar path – but for the reasons mentioned I think they’d be too difficult to execute in a satisfying way.

Instead I want to focus on a faction from Mass Effect 3′s DLC – the Leviathans. The Leviathan DLC is integrated into Mass Effect: Legendary Edition (albeit not especially well; there are some issues which arise from the timing of its insertion into the story) so I think we can safely assume that it’s fully canon and that most Mass Effect fans will have played it. Leviathan introduced Commander Shepard to the titular Leviathans – ancient lifeforms with the power to control minds.

Commander Shepard meets with one of the surviving Leviathans in *Mass Effect 3*.

The Leviathans revealed to Commander Shepard that their species created the Reapers; much like the way the quarians created the geth, the Reapers were artificial intelligences designed to aid the Leviathans. Of course, they soon betrayed their masters, having interpreted their directive to “preserve” all life in an apocalyptic manner.

Commander Shepard encountered a handful of Leviathans hiding deep below the surface of an uncharted ocean world. These were the survivors – or more likely the descendants of survivors – of a race whose empire once spanned the entire galaxy. The Leviathans were unapologetic for their dominance of other “lesser” races, who they forced to worship them as gods. The survivor who spoke with Commander Shepard had little regard for humans or other races, and seemed only willing to act in the Reaper War out of self-interest.

The Leviathans wanted other races to worship them and pay tribute to them.

Despite being in hiding for millions of years – perhaps longer – the Leviathans’ sense of self-importance was undimmed. They regard themselves as the galaxy’s “apex race,” and used their mind control powers to attack or kill anyone they perceived as even a minor threat.

The Leviathans seem to regard the entire Milky Way galaxy as their own personal fiefdom; their domain. Sharing power or joining a broader galactic community is simply not on their agenda, and with the destruction or removal of the Reapers, it seems at least plausible that they might seize the opportunity to emerge from hiding to reclaim the empire they had lost in the distant past.

The planet 2181 Despoina was the Leviathans’ hiding place.

On a much smaller scale, this was the Protheans’ idea. At least two Prothean facilities – on Eden Prime and Ilos – were designed to host hundreds of thousands of Protheans in hibernation, to emerge after the Reaper threat had passed. The Protheans failed in their goal – though a single individual did survive – but the Leviathans didn’t. They managed to sustain a viable population at the bottom of the ocean on an uncharted world, and although we only saw a few individuals it’s possible that there are hundreds, thousands, or even more Leviathans. They may even have populations on other worlds.

Of the three endings offered to the player at the conclusion of Mass Effect 3, a Leviathan return works best with the “destroy” ending. If Shepard opted to take control of the Reapers, it stands to reason that the Leviathans would still consider them to be a threat, whereas if Shepard chose the “synthesis” ending then presumably the fusing of organic and synthetic DNA across the galaxy would also have affected the Leviathans.

The “synthesis” ending would surely have affected the Leviathans as well as everyone else.

But if the Reapers were destroyed – the most popular ending choice – suddenly the Leviathans could find themselves in a galaxy where their biggest foe has been vanquished. Not only that, but with the Mass Relay network critically damaged and the combined fleets and forces of the galaxy all massed around Earth (and feeling a lot worse for wear after months of conflict, no doubt), the Milky Way might appear to them to be practically undefended – and ripe for the taking.

Striking out from their hidden undersea base, the Leviathans could use similar tactics to the Reapers to gain control of key worlds – using their mind control abilities to sway military and political leaders and bring them into the fold. From there, Leviathans could abandon their base, taking up residence at key locations around the galaxy before the survivors of the battle for Earth even realise what’s happened.

Amidst the wreckage of the Citadel and the ruins of Earth, it might be a long time before anyone realised the Leviathans were attacking.

Repairing the Mass Relays will take time – if the assembled scientific minds can even figure out how to do so – and with communications and travel disrupted across the galaxy on account of the long war, the Leviathans could establish a commanding position even if they didn’t make their move immediately.

A power vacuum on this scale is chaotic – and many war-weary citizens and refugees might even welcome Leviathan rule if it were accompanied by stability, and if the Leviathans could provide them with basic supplies like food and shelter. By the time the Council races realise what’s happened, large swathes of the galaxy could already be under Leviathan control – perhaps even including three of the four Council homeworlds.

The Leviathans could be the next threat for Commander Shepard and the rest of the galaxy.

Fighting the Leviathans would be similar, in some ways, to fighting the Reapers – their armies would largely consist of enthralled mind controlled victims of the galaxy’s races. The difference might be that taking on an actual Leviathan would be comparatively rare – unlike the Reapers, the Leviathans don’t seem like they’d want to get involved on the front lines, preferring instead to sit back (or hide) and let their enthralled victims do their dirty work.

So that’s the extent of this theory, really. To summarise it in a single sentence: with the Reapers defeated, the Leviathans finally emerge from hiding, intent on reclaiming a galaxy they’ve always considered to be “theirs.” Commander Shepard may be pressed back into action to save the galaxy all over again, or maybe we’ll take on the role of a new character when Mass Effect 4 is ready. Please keep in mind that, as always, I don’t have any “insider information.” This is nothing more than a fan theory – and it may very well be completely wrong!

Despite how I felt about Legendary Edition, I do like the Mass Effect series. In fact, the reason I was upset at BioWare for the sloppy work and unimpressive upgrades that Legendary Edition offered was because the games are so enjoyable – the series has the potential to be so much more than Legendary Edition made of it. I’m hopeful that Mass Effect 4 will be a game worth getting excited about – but there’s no rush. If BioWare and Electronic Arts have learned anything from recent releases, it should be to take their time!

Mass Effect: Legendary Edition is out now for PC, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One, and Xbox Series S/X. A new Mass Effect game – referred to above as Mass Effect 4 – is currently in development, but no release date has been announced. The Mass Effect series – including all properties mentioned above – is the copyright of BioWare and Electronic Arts. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

Mass Effect 4 – a wishlist

Sun 20.06.21Sun 13.11.22Dennis

Spoiler Warning: There are spoilers present for the Mass Effect games, including Legendary Edition and Andromeda.

When rumours of a Mass Effect trilogy remaster were swirling last year, I felt sure that one of the big reasons for working on an updated version of those games would be in anticipation of a sequel. We’ve had the tiniest of teases from EA and BioWare that a new Mass Effect project is in the works, and I’m tentatively calling the game Mass Effect 4.

There’s certainly an argument to be made that the original Mass Effect trilogy was unique, and we can point to the failure of the overblown side-mission Mass Effect: Andromeda to say that other projects set in this fictional world haven’t succeeded. Perhaps the Mass Effect trilogy doesn’t need a sequel; it’s very hard to top saving the entire galaxy from a narrative standpoint, after all, so any sequel risks feeling anticlimactic.

Regardless of any misgivings we may have, a sequel is coming. And while it may yet be several years away – the next Dragon Age game seems likely to be BioWare’s next project – barring any major problems we will eventually see it. So this is a preliminary wishlist from a Mass Effect fan, detailing a few things that I think the next entry should and shouldn’t include.

As always, please keep in mind that I have no “insider information.” This isn’t a list of things that definitely will be part of Mass Effect 4 or any future game in the series. It’s just a fan’s wishlist, nothing more. If I include something you don’t want to see, or exclude something you think the next game needs, please keep in mind that this is just one person’s subjective opinion! With all that out of the way, let’s jump into the list.

Number 1: A sequel not a prequel.

It’s *Mass Effect 4*, not *Mass Effect 1¾*.

I’ve heard some suggestions that the next Mass Effect title could be a prequel, perhaps focusing on humanity’s first contact with the turians. Over the course of the first three Mass Effect titles we’d learn that first contact did not go smoothly and led to a brief conflict. While that could be an interesting story to see, at least in theory, I don’t think now is the right moment for a backwards look.

After the disappointment of Mass Effect 3′s ending and the failure of Andromeda, the franchise needs to re-establish itself. There is absolutely scope for a Mass Effect prequel at some point in the future, but every fan I’ve spoken to would rather see the story move forward than look backwards, at least right now.

The ending of *Mass Effect 3* didn’t sit right with many fans.

It took the Star Trek franchise decades before the idea of a prequel was taken seriously, and it feels to me like Mass Effect could do more to build on what the trilogy accomplished in terms of setting, characters, and story. If Mass Effect 4 can guide the wayward franchise back to solid ground, maybe then we can reconsider the idea of making another attempt to expand beyond Commander Shepard and other familiar characters.

Though Mass Effect 3 did provide a definitive ending to Shepard’s story, and to the story of the Reaper War, all three variant endings teased that there was more to come for the denizens of the Mass Effect galaxy. Fans want to see that; we want to know what happens next.

Number 2: Bring back Commander Shepard.

Some stories feel very narrow, as though the world they’re set in doesn’t exist much beyond their protagonist. Mass Effect is not one of those, and the world-building done across the trilogy has created a setting that feels truly lived-in, inhabited by billions or perhaps trillions of unique individuals. So it may seem odd to return the series’ focus to its original protagonist, but in light of the failure of Andromeda, I think that’s what needs to happen.

Although the story of the war against the Reapers was decisively concluded – one way or another – by the end of Mass Effect 3, the story of the Mass Effect galaxy and of most of our crewmates and familiar characters was not. In that sense, the trilogy ended on a cliffhanger; we got a tease of what might come next, but nothing conclusive.

*Mass Effect 4* should bring back Commander Shepard.

That’s part of the reason why Andromeda was unsuccessful. It was a good idea – in theory – to try to expand Mass Effect beyond Commander Shepard, and I think that’s something we need to see more of in future. But because of the way the trilogy ended, fans wanted to know what came next for their favourite characters and races. Andromeda made absolutely no attempt to address any of that, instead trying to ignore the potential consequences of the Reaper War and tell its own story.

What BioWare and EA should have learned from the underwhelmed reaction fans had to Andromeda – aside from the need to actually finish their games before releasing them – is that sidestepping the Reaper War and its repercussions is not an option. We want to see familiar characters return, and follow the next chapter of their story.

Number 3: Significant visual and gameplay improvements over Legendary Edition.

Many textures and visual elements of *Legendary Edition* had not been noticeably improved and look outdated in 2021.

Legendary Edition was a disappointment. The three games themselves were fine, but they hadn’t been upgraded or worked on anywhere near as much as they could’ve been, and overall I felt that the so-called “remaster” was not worth the price. Mass Effect 4 can’t repeat that mistake. The new game needs a brand-new game engine, one suitable for a third-person role-playing shooter in the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 era.

The Mass Effect trilogy as presented in Legendary Edition was in a weird place both visually and in terms of gameplay. Some aspects aged well and felt good in 2021 – the basic cover-based shooting being a good example. But many other parts of the trilogy felt really outdated when compared to genuinely modern titles. Lip-synching is a good example – characters’ mouths in Legendary Edition seemed to flap open with the scantest connection to the dialogue supposedly being spoken. There are dozens more examples of things like that; areas where the gameplay was fine in 2007 but not 2021.

Improving things like lip-synching will make the next game feel more immersive than *Legendary Edition*.

Mass Effect 4 needs to address those issues and make sure they aren’t present. Nobody wants the visuals of Mass Effect 3 again – not even the Legendary Edition version. Games in 2021 can look significantly better as well as feel more expansive – look at games like Jedi: Fallen Order or Control as just a couple of examples, or even how titles like Subnautica and No Man’s Sky pushed for different gameplay mechanics and visuals.

The cinematic teaser that BioWare showed off a few months ago looked good, but any idiot can make a pretty CGI trailer. The actual game engine is where the real work needs to be done, and the adapted engine used for Legendary Edition is out of date and won’t cut it.

Number 4: Don’t re-use the same basic narrative.

Let’s not bring back the Reapers… or a stand-in for them!

Narrative is difficult to get right in any project, not least one which is taking place after a story has already been completed. Mass Effect 3 was a definitive end to the trilogy, and that leaves Mass Effect 4 with a problem. What comes next after the end of the Reaper War? Not only that, but how will players interact with a post-Reaper galaxy?

There will be a huge temptation to basically recreate the original trilogy, substituting the Reapers for some other nefarious, galaxy-threatening faction. But that would be far too derivative, and as the Star Wars franchise has learned to its cost, there is a line between paying homage to what came before and outright copying – and fans can tell the difference.

There’s a line between respectful homage and overreliance on the past. Star Wars crossed it – hopefully Mass Effect won’t.

At the same time as avoiding a simple retelling of the Reaper War, Mass Effect 4 has to manage not to feel anticlimactic. That will be very difficult, because if Commander Shepard comes back from the dead and is tasked with apprehending a minor criminal or helping Aria keep the peace on Omega, the story will feel too small in comparison to what came before.

Once again, there’s a balance to be struck. The new game needs a new story – one that doesn’t rip off the original games or try to retell the same basic “galactic threat” narrative. It also needs to have a story that can match the epic feel of the original without leaving players feeling underwhelmed. It’s a difficult path to navigate – and as we know from Star Wars, even highly accomplished storytellers can get it utterly wrong.

Number 5: Pick one ending from Mass Effect 3 and stick with it.

Whether it’s “synthesis,” “destroy,” or “control,” *Mass Effect 4* needs to stick with one ending from the trilogy instead of trying to incorporate all three.

It isn’t going to be possible for one game to incorporate three totally different narratives based on the three endings of Mass Effect 3. The ending options are too different from one another for each to be the jumping-off point for the same basic story. The “destroy” ending killed off all synthetic life; “control” saw Shepard seize control of the Reapers and simply make them fly away; and “synthesis” fused synthetics and organics together. Even if the basic storyline of the game is based around something that would impact the galaxy no matter which ending were chosen, the galaxy is going to be a very different place when that narrative kicks off.

I’m all for ambitious games, but trying to incorporate all three ending choices into Mass Effect 4 would either mean BioWare would have to make three very different games in one package, or it would mean that one story would have to be forced to fit three very different settings – and that almost certainly wouldn’t work in two out of three cases.

The “control” ending is the one I feel works least well.

If Mass Effect 4 intends to bring back Commander Shepard, there’s only one option based on what we’ve seen on screen: the “destroy” ending. That ending is, according to information I could find, at any rate, the most popular among players – and I would argue that it probably best represents Shepard achieving their goal!

But Mass Effect 3 appeared to present “synthesis” in the most positive light, both during Shepard’s conversation with the Catalyst and based on EDI’s epilogue. Choosing “synthesis” as a starting point for a new game would be incredibly controversial, I think, and the changes made to everyone in the galaxy by that ending may make it hard to craft a story. It’s also an ending in which Shepard is unequivocally dead. Regardless, I think those are the two most likely choices.

Number 6: Resolve dangling story threads from Andromeda.

My face is tired… of waiting for a proper ending to *Mass Effect: Andromeda*.

This doesn’t need to be a big part of the game. It could literally be a collection of codex entries or other random bits of information picked up over the course of the game. In short, Andromeda’s story was left unresolved due to the decision to cancel its planned story DLC. All Mass Effect 4 would need to do is somehow acknowledge what happened with the final arks that were heading to Andromeda.

The quarian ark was the main one that I can recall being missing, and if Commander Shepard were to pick up a datapad in Mass Effect 4 that showed the quarian ark departing for Andromeda a few weeks behind schedule, we could consider the mystery resolved. The characters from Andromeda could thus continue to exist and we could assume that they all lived happily ever after.

There will never be a sequel to Andromeda, I think. The game was memed to death due to its bugs and glitches when it launched, and its reputation never recovered. EA’s decision to abandon the failing game meant that there was no chance of a No Man’s Sky-style rehabilitation, and the game is an overlooked part of the franchise. If people remember it at all, they remember the bugs and the memes.

Even I can’t remember every detail of Andromeda’s story. I just know that there was a sense that it ended somewhat abruptly, and if Mass Effect 4 could do something to mitigate that, even just by way of an “easter egg” for longstanding fans of the series, I think that would be great. It really wouldn’t take a lot of effort.

Number 7: A story that genuinely reflects player choices.

There are many different ways that the story could go. The game should reflect those choices properly.

The worst part of Mass Effect 3 wasn’t the “pick a colour” ending. It was the fact that, across at least the final third of the game, myriad choices that players made across the entire trilogy received no meaningful payoff. Even the War Assets that Shepard collected on the path to defeating the Reapers were only ever shown as text on a screen, and many War Assets even reused the same stock image.

Things like saving both the quarians and geth, which required players to navigate a specific path across all three games and multiple optional missions, should have been more impactful in the final push to defeat the Reapers. The fact is that Mass Effect 3 was rushed, and whatever intentions BioWare may have had ended up being cut or curtailed as a result.

Mass Effect 4 simply cannot repeat this failing. The game will almost certainly follow a non-linear narrative – as is the Mass Effect tradition – with paragon and renegade options, a branching storyline, and optional side-missions. Those choices have to feel like they matter to players; if everyone gets the same basic ending regardless of how they played the game, Mass Effect 4 will receive one heck of a backlash.

It’s possible that Mass Effect 4 will be the jumping-off point for a new trilogy of games, and if that’s the case its ending may need to be simplified in order to ensure the next game in the series works as intended. But if that is the plan, the story still needs to offer a good degree of choice – and reflect those choices properly while the game is progressing.

Number 8: The return of all surviving squadmates.

Mass Effect 3 picked up some criticism at the time of its release for cutting back on the number of squadmates, with very few members of Shepard’s team from the Suicide Mission in Mass Effect 2 returning in squadmate form. Practically everyone had something to do in the game – but many fan-favourite squadmates were no longer part of the team, with their appearances relegated to a mission or two at most.

Depending on many different choices across the trilogy, it’s possible for a number of squadmates from all three games to have survived – or at least to have still been alive as of the final act of the game. I would love to see Mass Effect 4 bring them all back as proper squadmates. It would take some creative writing in certain cases – Wrex, for example, appears to have a leadership role on Tuchanka in one possible version of the story – but it would absolutely be worth doing. In the Star Trek franchise, Worf, who was a character on Deep Space Nine, was able to be included in three films with the crew of The Next Generation despite having a different posting. If Star Trek can do it, Mass Effect can do it!

Wrex could be a problem, but I think it’s possible to get around that and bring him back anyway.

Not every squadmate resonated with every player, and giving fans the freedom to pick and choose from every past member of Shepard’s crew instead of being constrained to a few hand-picked ones would make the roleplaying experience so much better and more immersive. I mentioned this during my review of Legendary Edition, but “my” Commander Shepard is a different character to other Shepards. They had different friendships, different relationships, and the game is a different experience as a result. Mass Effect 4 will do its best to reflect that, no doubt, and one way to do so is to bring back every surviving squadmate.

This doesn’t mean that there can’t be one or two new characters, and indeed I’d welcome a new couple of squadmates in addition to returning favourites. The franchise needs to grow, after all!

Number 9: Allow players to carry over characters from Legendary Edition.

Players should be able to import their *Legendary Edition* characters to *Mass Effect 4*.

Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 allowed players to take their Commander Shepard from the previous game and import them. This worked really well, and meant that players could complete the entire story without having to begin from scratch with each new game. Though Legendary Edition has some problems and inconsistencies with the way this save importer works, I think it’s absolutely worth allowing players to take their version of Commander Shepard into the next game.

There are a couple of roadblocks that I can see – the first being the ending choices. If Mass Effect 4 does what I suggest and picks one ending, players who made a different choice would have to either reload their save and re-do the ending, or the importer would have to simply ignore this choice.

All decisions and all surviving squadmates should be imported as well.

However, if Mass Effect 4 is to reflect other choices, like which characters survived, which factions players chose to help and ignore, etc. then an import facility is really the only way that could happen. Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 originally came with an “interactive comic” to allow new players to make certain key decisions, but that really isn’t a great option.

Part of the reason Legendary Edition was made was to bring the Mass Effect series back into contention so that Mass Effect 4 will generate hype, excitement, and sales. It succeeded in that regard, bringing back old players, picking up many new ones, and wiping away most of the stink left over from Andromeda and, to a lesser extent, Anthem. People are looking forward to Mass Effect 4. Having played through the trilogy with our own custom characters, though, and made many decisions which impacted the Mass Effect galaxy, those characters and choices need to carry over to the next game in the series. Even if Commander Shepard isn’t coming back, Mass Effect 4 needs to have the facility for players to import their choices from the original trilogy.

So that’s it.

What happened after the Reaper War? I can’t wait to find out!

Mass Effect 4 is several years away from release, and we’re unlikely to get any more details any time soon. I don’t even want to guess at when we could see the game – it could be 2023, 2024, or even later still depending on all manner of development-side factors.

Despite that, it was a bit of fun to look ahead and consider what I’d like to see from the title. Although I felt Legendary Edition was underwhelming and not all it could’ve been for a remaster, the Mass Effect games are great fun, and the world-building is exquisite. The Mass Effect galaxy feels genuinely lived-in in a way few sci-fi or fantasy worlds ever really achieve, and I’m not alone in looking forward to finding out what happens next!

If we get any significant Mass Effect 4 news, such as casting information, a new trailer, or anything else, be sure to check back as I’ll do my best to analyse it all here on the website.

Mass Effect: Legendary Edition is out now for PC, PlayStation 4, PlayStation 5, Xbox One, and Xbox Series S/X. The Mass Effect series – including Legendary Edition and all other titles mentioned above – is the copyright of Electronic Arts and BioWare. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.

E3 2021 – predictions and/or wishes

Fri 04.06.21Sat 20.09.25Dennis

Spoiler Warning: There are minor spoilers present for the following games: Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order, Knights of the Old Republic I & II, Mass Effect 3, and Mass Effect: Legendary Edition.

After taking a year off in 2020, the Electronic Entertainment Expo – better known as E3 – is returning later this month. In fact, many large games companies have events or announcements scheduled for June, meaning we could be in for practically an entire month of previews, trailers, teasers, and demos for a number of great upcoming titles. This time I thought it could be fun to look ahead to E3 – and other June events – and maybe make a few predictions about what we might see! There might also be a few wishes or fantasies thrown in as well!

From Microsoft and Electronic Arts to Nintendo and Ubisoft, practically all of the big names in the games industry will have something to say over the next few weeks. Much of the attention will be focused on this year’s digital E3 event, which officially takes place from the 12th to the 15th of June, but I think we can expect other big announcements outside of those dates as well.

My usual caveat applies: I have no “insider information.” Today’s list is nothing more than guesswork and speculation, with a fair amount of hoping and fantasising thrown in for good measure! With that out of the way, let’s take a look at some of my predictions (and wishes) for what we might see at this year’s E3!

Number 1: Starfield

Bethesda’s next game has been common knowledge for years, and even while they’ve been working on Fallout 76 and porting Skyrim to smart fridges, development on this sci-fi role-playing game has continued. Rumour has it that Starfield is now edging closer to being complete, and it’s possible we could even see a release date announced at E3 – maybe even for later this year or the first half of next year.

Other than a sci-fi setting that may include some degree of space travel, actual information about Starfield has been hard to come by. The disappointment of Fallout 76, and Bethesda’s refusal to consider developing or licensing a new game engine to replace the outdated Gamebryo/Creation Engine that they’ve used for more than two decades, leaves me at least a little anxious about Starfield’s prospects, with any hype or excitement I might’ve felt at the latest big Bethesda release replaced by cautious interest. However, there’s potential in Starfield, and I hope that we’ll get a fantastic game.

Microsoft now owns Bethesda and all its current and upcoming games.

If Bethesda hadn’t learned their lesson following the calamitous launch of Fallout 76, December’s Cyberpunk 2077 catastrophe should serve as another reminder that players simply will not tolerate a broken, unfinished, “release now, fix later” mess. So as interested as I am to see Starfield, I’d very much rather that it was delayed if needs be. It would be great to see it at E3 and begin to get excited for its release, but only if it’s ready!

Bethesda has recently been acquired by Microsoft in a multi-billion dollar deal, so Starfield will almost certainly be announced as an Xbox and PC exclusive. Sorry PlayStation fans!

Number 2: Mario Kart 9

I’ve talked about the possibility of a new Mario Kart game several times over the past few months here on the website, and the reason is simple: next year will be the Mario Kart series’ 30th anniversary. Nintendo loves to make a big deal of anniversaries, as we saw just a few months ago with the 35th anniversary of Super Mario. Although nothing is confirmed and I should point out that we don’t even know for sure that Mario Kart 9 is in development, putting the pieces together makes this one seem at least plausible!

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has been the best-selling game on Nintendo Switch since it arrived on the platform, but it’s only a port of a Wii U game from 2014. After more than seven years, this is the longest dry spell the Mario Kart series has ever endured, and it seems like the perfect time to give the Switch its own original Mario Kart title.

2022 will be the series’ 30th anniversary.

As a celebration of all things Mario Kart, it would be great to see racetracks from past iterations return, as well as drivers from across Nintendo titles and even from other games altogether. If Mario Kart 9 is to be released in time for the anniversary next year, announcing it at E3 makes a lot of sense – building up the hype and giving fans plenty of time to get excited!

I’m not sure whether to classify this one as a wish or a prediction, because I feel certain that Nintendo will be doing something to mark the Mario Kart series’ anniversary – but will they announce it this month? We’ll have to see!

Number 3: Anything Star Trek

Could a new Star Trek game be on the horizon?

The Star Trek franchise has not done well in the gaming realm. In recent years, Star Trek Online has been the only game in town – literally – and as someone who isn’t big on massively multiplayer online games, it just isn’t “my thing.” I’d love to see ViacomCBS take advantage of Star Trek’s return to the small screen and commission a video game adaptation. Whether that would be something connected to a classic show or something based on modern Star Trek wouldn’t matter to me – though I could see the advantages of a game based on Discovery or Picard from the company’s perspective.

This is definitely a pure wish, because I’ve heard no rumours nor seen any indication that ViacomCBS has any plans to license out Star Trek in a big way. There are mobile games, the online game, and there was even a browser game earlier this year, but when it comes to putting together the kind of single-player title that I’d really love to see, the Star Trek franchise hasn’t shown any interest since the disastrous 2013 Kelvin timeline game.

2013’s *Star Trek* was not a good game, unfortunately.

It’s possible that that buggy, poorly-received title has harmed Star Trek’s brand from a gaming point of view, which is such a shame. There should be a pretty big overlap between Trekkies and gamers, but the franchise has consistently failed to capitalise on that, with Star Trek games going all the way back to the ’80s being of little interest to most folks.

If ViacomCBS could contract a big studio to put out the equivalent of a Jedi: Fallen Order or Mass Effect I’d be beyond thrilled. Will it happen at E3 – or ever? I have no idea. Probably not, but there’s always hope!

Number 4: Fall Guys coming to Switch and Xbox

*Fall Guys* is coming to Switch… eventually.

Though Fall Guys promised earlier in the year that a release on both Switch and Xbox is on the cards, there’s currently no release date on the schedule. Announcing one at E3 would be a big boost for the fun little obstacle course-battle royale game, and as I’ve said on a few occasions now, Nintendo Switch in particular feels like a perfect fit for Fall Guys.

There have been some improvements made to Fall Guys recently, like the addition of cross-platform play, the introduction of new rounds and round variants, and additional challenges that make logging in and playing more frequently feel rewarding. But there’s still a ways to go for Fall Guys if new owners Epic Games hope to break into the upper echelons of multiplayer gaming.

Hopefully *Fall Guys* will continue to improve – as well as finally be released on other platforms.

Fall Guys had “a moment” in August last year, in the days immediately following its release. But issues with cheating soured a lot of players on the game, and there’s work to do to rebuild both its reputation and playerbase. The announcement of Switch and Xbox versions of the game would bring renewed attention to Fall Guys, perhaps convincing lapsed players to pick it up again.

Though developers Mediatonic have stated that there are no current plans to make Fall Guys free-to-play, the delay in getting the Switch and Xbox versions ready makes me wonder if a bigger overhaul is on the cards. Announcing it at E3, with the eyes of players around the world on the games industry, would make a lot of sense and drum up plenty of hype.

Number 5: Knights of the Old Republic III/Knights of the High Republic

A new *Knights of the Old Republic* would make a lot of fans very happy indeed!

Rumours swirled earlier in the year of a new entry in the Knights of the Old Republic series of Star Wars role-playing games. Originally developed by BioWare, with a sequel created by Oblivion, the Knights of the Old Republic games are among my favourite games of all-time, and a sequel just sounds fantastic!

The Star Wars franchise is seemingly stepping away from its exclusive deal with Electronic Arts, so perhaps a studio like Oblivion could come back to pick up the mantle. Or we could learn that BioWare is coming back to the series that laid the groundwork for titles like Mass Effect and Dragon Age.

It’s been 17 years since Knights of the Old Republic II was released, so that could mean a new entry in the series won’t be a direct sequel and will instead focus on new characters. The so-called “High Republic” era is currently a big deal in Star Wars spin-off media, focusing on a time period about 300 years prior to the film series – and several millennia after Knights of the Old Republic. I can’t help but wonder if a new game could be Knights of the High Republic instead!

However, Knights of the Old Republic II definitely teased a sequel, and the stories of both Revan and the Jedi Exile are arguably incomplete (despite some mentions or appearances in the online multiplayer game The Old Republic). The Star Wars franchise has recently been in the habit of announcing games shortly before their launch – like last year’s Squadrons. If that happens again, maybe we’ll get a new Star Wars game later this year!

Number 6: Jedi: Fallen Order II

Sticking with Star Wars, we know that Respawn Entertainment is currently working on a sequel to 2019’s Jedi: Fallen Order. Though development may have only begun in earnest when the success of the first game became apparent, it’s not inconceivable that there’ll be something concrete to show off at this year’s E3, even if the game isn’t coming any time soon.

Cal Kestis’ story could take a different direction in the sequel, as the end of the first game left things open-ended and with no clear destination. Jedi: Fallen Order introduced us to some amazing characters, and it’s going to be wonderful to find out what comes next for all of them. I doubt Jedi: Fallen Order II will be released this year – it may not even be released next year – but a little tease to keep fans interested is no bad thing at an event like this!

It would be great to see Cal and the gang return.

Jedi: Fallen Order definitively proved to companies that have been moving away from single-player titles that there’s still a lot of room for success and profit in the medium. That’s an incredibly positive legacy for any game, and after fans had been vocal about wanting a single-player, story-focused Star Wars game, the fact that it succeeded and sold millions of copies showed Electronic Arts and other big companies that it’s worth investing in this kind of title.

I’m happy to wait for Jedi: Fallen Order II. The original game was released without major bugs or glitches, something which should be expected but which won it a lot of praise in an industry where “release now, fix later” has almost become the norm. Rather than rush the sequel, I hope Respawn and EA take their time to give it the polish it deserves.

Number 7: Mass Effect 4

It would make a lot of sense for BioWare and Electronic Arts to capitalise on the successful release of Mass Effect: Legendary Edition to at least tease or hint at what’s coming next for the franchise. We know, thanks to an earlier announcement, that Mass Effect 4 is in early development, but aside from a cinematic teaser we know nothing about the next entry in the series.

One of the reasons Mass Effect: Andromeda didn’t succeed (aside from its bugs and launch issues) was that it ignored the ending of the third game and tried to do its own thing off to one side. The end of the Reaper War was a significant moment for the Mass Effect galaxy and its races, and piecing together what happens next is something many fans are interested in, despite the disappointment many felt at the three ending options for Mass Effect 3.

With the Reaper War over, where will the drama and action come from in *Mass Effect 4*?

Mass Effect 4 has a difficult task. It has to follow on from an epic “war to end all wars” type of story in a way that doesn’t feel anticlimactic and small. That’s not going to be easy, and I can understand why BioWare instead chose to tell a side-story in Andromeda instead of trying to confront this challenge head-on. With the game in development, though, I assume they’ve figured something out!

Mass Effect: Legendary Edition can be seen as a test or a dry run for a new game, and judging by the success it’s seen over the last couple of weeks, I have no doubt that a new entry in the series will be highly anticipated by fans.

Number 8: Grand Theft Auto 6

After almost a decade, *surely* a new Grand Theft Auto game can’t be too far away?

For too long Rockstar have been milking Grand Theft Auto V’s online mode, and it’s time for a change. After the longest gap between games in the history of the franchise, a new title in the open-world crime saga is long overdue, and it would be great to get some kind of news – even just the tiniest tease – at E3.

Rockstar has already committed to porting Grand Theft Auto V to PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series S/X, diverting time, money, and development resources away from making a new game. I’ve said before that Grand Theft Auto V has run its course by now, and the disappointed reaction from fans to news of a port to new consoles backs that up. It’s high time for a new title.

*Grand Theft Auto V’*s port to new hardware left many players upset.

Will it happen, though? I mean it will eventually happen, of course; there’s too much money in the brand to let it end with Grand Theft Auto V. But despite the fact that some players have been vocal about wanting a new title, Rockstar has thus far shown no signs of working on a sequel. In some ways, perhaps the success of Grand Theft Auto V has become a problem for the franchise; the more time passes, the harder it will be for any sequel to live up to its illustrious predecessor.

Finding a way for Grand Theft Auto 6 to differentiate itself from the current iteration of the series is also a challenge. Another sunlit coastal city in the present day probably won’t cut it – so where should Rockstar take the series? Maybe we’ll see the first indications soon!

Number 9: Civilization VII

It’s been almost five years since the release of Civilization VI, so it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that a new entry in the series is in development. The most recent expansion pack for Civilization VI – titled the New Frontier pass – may be the game’s last, with no further announcements of DLC coming since last year. Perhaps Firaxis has already begun to shift development to a new game?

I was pleasantly surprised by Civilization VI when I picked it up in 2016. Having not been a big fan of previous turn-based strategy games I was initially sceptical, but I’m glad I took the plunge! I ended up sinking hundreds of hours into Civilization VI as the last decade drew to a close, and there’s a lot to be said for the series.

The Civilization series has come a long way since its inception in the early 1990s!

A new game would shake up the formula without reinventing the wheel, introducing different ways to play or bringing back successful features from past entries in the series. There would also be the potential to introduce brand-new factions and leaders – a subject I took a look at a few weeks ago.

Series like Civilization, which don’t see annual releases, can sometimes cause controversy if a new entry is regarded as being released “too soon” after the previous one. But the Civilization franchise has usually put out a new game roughly every four to five years on average, so the time could be coming for a new entry.

Number 10: Xbox Game Pass

Xbox Game Pass is a great and inexpensive way to get access to a large library of titles.

Game Pass has taken off over the last few months, and is one of the most compelling arguments in favour of buying an Xbox right now, as well as offering a relatively inexpensive way into gaming in general. Microsoft will be making a big appearance at E3, and I can’t help but wonder what news they’ll have regarding Game Pass.

Some have suggested that a deal might be on the table to bring Xbox Game Pass to Nintendo Switch or even PlayStation; I’m not sure that’s practical considering the divide between Microsoft and Sony in particular, but you never know! After Bethesda and EA Play have both brought significant libraries of games to the service in recent months, I’m beginning to wonder what’s left for Microsoft to possibly add!

EA, Bethesda, and more… Game Pass continues to grow!

Regardless, I’m sure that any titles Microsoft show off, including big Bethesda titles like Starfield or even The Elder Scrolls VI, will be coming to Game Pass, so that’s a good start. But using the opportunity of E3 to really push the service and show how it’s continuing to expand would be great from Microsoft’s perspective.

PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X consoles are still sold out everywhere, but there seem to be more Xbox Series S consoles available at the moment. Game Pass also makes picking up a pre-owned Xbox One a pretty good proposition in the short term, so Microsoft has a lot of scope this month to hook in and convert players to their platform – and Game Pass is the way to do it.

Number 11: Halo Infinite

*Halo Infinite* was delayed, but it’s still being worked on.

Speaking of Microsoft and Xbox, following a disappointing reveal last year, Halo Infinite was postponed. Originally the game was supposed to be the Xbox Series S/X’s flagship launch title, but as I predicted at the time, its absence ultimately didn’t prove a huge hurdle for the new console’s launch.

Since original developer Bungie abandoned the Halo series to pursue Destiny in 2010, the series has struggled to hit the highs of earlier titles. Halo 4 and Halo 5 were both well-received by some fans but disliked by others, and there’s a sense that the Halo series really needs a win with its next iteration. I fully support developers 343 Industries delaying the project and taking the necessary time to bash it into shape. Maybe we’ll see what they’ve been working on at E3!

With a Halo television series also in the works, it should be a good time to be a fan of the sci-fi shooter series. Hopefully the issues with Infinite have been ironed out, and even if there’s still no definite word on when it’ll be released, there will be something to show off to tide fans over and restore hope in the series’ future.

I enjoyed playing Halo and Halo 2 back on the original Xbox, and I’ve recently had fun with The Master Chief Collection on PC, which included a couple of titles I hadn’t played. I’m interested to see what Infinite will bring to the table.

Number 12: Elden Ring

A figure from the *Elden Ring* teaser trailer.

I have to be honest: I’m not sure if Elden Ring is going to be “my kind of thing.” Don’t get me wrong, I like George R R Martin – who’s working with developer FromSoftware on the project – but the teaser trailer gave off a kind of horror vibe that just rubbed me the wrong way, I guess.

I’m also not a fan of FromSoftware’s “extreme difficulty for the sake of it” style of gameplay. There’s no indication that Elden Ring will be as horribly difficult as the likes of Dark Souls, but the developer’s reputation precedes them, and their unwillingness to add difficulty options in their games is not something I appreciate. For those reasons and more it may end up being a game I skip!

A rather creepy moment from the teaser trailer.

Despite that, I like the idea of a new dark fantasy role-playing game. The involvement of George R R Martin has a lot of fans understandably excited, as he’s one of the best authors working in the genre today. Other than that, and a short cinematic teaser, we don’t know very much at all about Elden Ring – so this could be the moment for Bandai Namco to finally show off some gameplay!

If I were being hopeful, I guess I’d say that I’d like to see a darker, more polished looking version of The Elder Scrolls, with plenty of side-missions, lots of factions to join or fight against, and a main story that can be played through right away or sidelined in favour of doing other things. Whether Elden Ring will be anything like that, or whether it’ll be closer to Dark Souls is anyone’s guess at the moment!

Number 13: Super Mario 64 remake

This is a game that I truly felt was a possibility last year, when Nintendo was marking the 35th anniversary of the Super Mario series. Ultimately the company opted to include a pretty crappy version of Super Mario 64 – with a weird screen resolution that left black bars on all four sides of the screen – as part of the underwhelming Super Mario 3D All-Stars collection.

But maybe the rumours of a reimagining of this classic 3D platformer from 1996 weren’t just made up! Maybe Super Mario 64 is being remade using the engine from Super Mario Odyssey, and maybe it’ll be announced this month! Maybe.

*Super Mario 3D All-Stars* did not do justice to this game. A full remake would be amazing, though!

There are relatively few games that I’d be really excited to see remade, because in a lot of cases – especially when dealing with relatively recent games – the original versions still hold up pretty well. But after 25 years, there’s definitely scope to remake Super Mario 64, bringing it up-to-date for a new generation of players.

With the game’s 25th anniversary happening this year, perhaps Nintendo’s love of anniversary events will have convinced them it’s worth putting together a remake! Either way, if you can find a copy the original game is well worth playing if you missed it first time around.

Number 14: Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga

Teaser art for *Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga*.

The third Star Wars title on this list is a fun one! Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga was originally due for release last year, before being delayed. The game will be a follow-up to the very successful 2007 game Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga, which if you haven’t played I can’t recommend highly enough!

The chance to revisit the Star Wars world with a fun Lego twist – in high definition, this time – has been appealing since The Skywalker Saga was announced a couple of years ago, and this is one game I’m definitely looking forward to. When it was delayed there was mention of a 2021 release, but no date or even release window has yet been elaborated on. Maybe E3 could be the right moment!

Rey and Kylo Ren clash in another promo screenshot for the game.

Though they arguably overdid it and burned out somewhere in the late 2000s or early 2010s, Lego adaptations of popular franchises have been a lot of fun. Lego Star Wars was one of the first to really go mainstream and see big success, but other titles which adapted properties like Indiana Jones and Pirates of the Caribbean were good fun as well.

It would be great to get a solid release date and see a little more of the game. Adapting all nine films in the Star Wars series into a single game is no mean feat, but it’s a challenge that developer Traveller’s Tales has never shied away from. I’m sure that The Skywalker Saga will prove to be a worthy successor to previous Lego Star Wars titles.

So that’s it! A few of my predictions – and wishes – for this month’s E3.

Could you tell which were predictions and which were wishes? I’m not sure I could tell you which were which in every case, so don’t worry! After a rough year, which hasn’t been helped by myriad delays and shortages, it’ll be nice to see players getting genuinely excited about upcoming titles once again. Whatever is ultimately announced or revealed, I’m sure there’ll be something of interest to me, something I can put on my wishlist for later in the year!

Though I’ve never been to E3, I did attend two iterations of GamesCom – Europe’s biggest games fair – in the past when I used to work for a large games company. As I said last year, these digital events are arguably the future of games marketing. Not only are they substantially cheaper than paying to rent a convention centre in California, but it gives the companies greater control over their own messaging. Though the headline this year is “E3 is back!” I would argue that it isn’t – not really. E3 was an in-person event, an overblown trade fair that started allowing members of the public to attend. What we’re going to see this month will be all-digital and quite different.

I hope this was a bit of fun as we look ahead to E3. There are plenty of upcoming games to get excited about, and I shall be watching the various presentations with interest!

All titles mentioned above are the trademark or copyright of their respective studio, developer, and/or publisher. Some screenshots and promotional artwork courtesy of press kits on IGDB. E3 2021 takes place digitally from the 12th to the 15th of June, with additional events taking place throughout the month of June. This article contains the thoughts and opinions of one person only and is not intended to cause any offence.