Mass Effect 3 promises to be an explosive end to Bioware’s trilogy, but will it be the end of its universe?

“Not at all no,” says Bioware CEO Dr. Ray Mazuka when we put the question to him at Gamescom this year. “We have ambitious plans to continue this franchise going forward. Mass Effect 3 is simultaneously a couple of different things; a thrilling and epic conclusion to the trilogy as we promised our fans we’d provide for Commander Shepard, but it’s also a brand new beginning – it’s an entry point for new fans and it’s also a brand new beginning.”
 
But does this mean an end to our favourite deep-space reporter puncher? No more arguments over hair colour? No more comparisons between Mark Meer and Jennifer Hale? No more Shepard?

“Yes,” producer Michael Gamble told us. “After this, Commander Shepard’s story is complete.”

“So even if there are more games in the Mass Effect universe, he/she definitely won’t be in them?

“Correct.”

With its detailed universe and huge cast, there was never much chance of Mass Effect fading from the stars just because the Reapers were pointed to the door. Not everything revolves around Shepard, and with so many worlds, there’s never going to be a shortage of stories to focus on. But where would you like to see the series go next? An MMO? A Homeworld style strategy game involving the Flotila? Another RPG, picking up the adventures of a specific character? Or do you think it just won’t be the same without Shepard, Joker and the gang leading the way? Share your ideas here…

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/08/28/bioware-with-mass-effect-3-commander-shepards-story-is-complete/

that's better... Every story needs an end. But the universe can still be used.

hope there answer is not an MMO >_

Not sure how I feel about that. I like Mass Effect but I also like to rage about things.

The Mass Effect universe can be used for spin offs.

Legions of tennis, curling, dancing, party games are awaiting us.

No Sheppard, is that really necessary? I mean you don't need to save the universe to tell a fantastic story all the time.

Hahahahaaa.  I swear, your avatar tonally fits your posts more often than not.

Am I the only one that couldn't stop reading this as "Shepherd dies in ME3"???

He dies atleast once and can die twice in ME2 as well... (at the start) and if you try to get shepard to die at the end of ME2. (not the game over screen, but an ending)

If I remember, bioware said him dieing  ME2 ending doesn't affect ME3. (I could be wrong, and hopefully the explanation isn't dumb).

Him dieing really doesn't mean he is dead forever :p

But ME3 supposedly starts with Shepard being judged for what happened in one of the DLCs, so the endin of ME2 do affect ME3 (unless they revive Shepard again just to be judged).

@Darth Tigris_ I have the same "fear", but it also makes sense. After all, how many time can one save the universe and survive?

Well, expected. I love the ME franchise, so I'm glad that it isn't over after ME3, but I'm also happy that we don't have to wait another 2 or 3 games until the story is complete.

@Darth

That would be in keeping with the Arrival expansion. Where it was very much indicated that this was going to be a all to unoriginal last stand scenario. Simply dripping with the romantic notion that going down valiantly in what seems a futile struggle in order to save others is simply the best ending imaginable. This has left me positively cold on this series. I have never bought into the idea of a no win scenario, or the glory of a mass suicide.

If that is the case, and as you can guess I think it probably is the case. Then I genuinely do not want anything to do with this game. It is simply a chicken shit move by writers who think doing that makes them edgy. More so it truly would be insulting to players. It would send the wrong message. If all your past decisions end in exactly the same outcome. Then making them in the first place was a waste of time.