243 réponses à ce sujet

[Masticetobbacco]

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Well you see the thing is the guy who coined the phrase agrees with me. I would think the guy who actually came up with that **** would know better than lolwikipedia.

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

[Noble 1]

smudboy wrote...

Right. I can understand a particular phenotype from a whole bunch of humans, let's say, muscle tissue, that would be going into building the muscles of a giant human Reaper. As opposed to, melting an entire human down and somehow grafting them onto a robot skeleton by simply pumping it into...something. That is completely stupid.
Let alone, why a giant human Reaper? What's the utility? I thought Reapers were million year old nations of AI's in giant ships with super intelligence? What possible function would a giant human like cyborg be? Especially since Reapers see organic life as a bunch of ants waiting to be crushed.
Again, there can be answers to these questions, but we never got any. All they had to do was tell us.

EDI speculated (which  is as good as fact, because EDI doesn't make mistakes) that the Reapers reproduce by creating new reapers in the for of the most recent terminated race.  It was explained

[Masticetobbacco]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

dude TL;DR

someone summarize him for me

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Archereon wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

TheLostGenius wrote...

You don't have to be a science geek to be baffled by the ridiculous-ness. In terms of playability it was "more fun" than Saren. But plot-wise it was almost like "jumping the shark. Let's just hope we don't have to fight "embryo human reapers" in ME3.

Do you even know what jumping the shark means?

Oh and Super Saiyan Saren at the end of ME1 was just as every bit as ridiculous, scientifically.

Not really, so long as his implants were comprehensive enough to function without him being alive, its somewhat plausible.  

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

dude TL;DR

someone summarize him for me

His problem with human reaper is because he doesn't find it scientifically plausible and in general feels that ME2 ruins the standard set for scientific accuracy in ME1.

I agree human reaper is of course massively stupid but there's no such thing as scientific accuracy in this universe it's all a bunch of stupid psuedo science bullsh*t just like every other sci-fi series.

I mean the genre is called science fiction because the fictional stories are centered around the discovery or invention of technology and how that technology effects the world of the story. The term has precisely nothing to do with how realistic the technology in the story may or may not be.

[Noble 1]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

You know... if any of this stuff was possible based on 2010 scientific knowledge, we'd have built it. Like the mass relays. Or biotic implants. But if you look at it properly, all of it has some fatal scientific flaw and would never work. I'm just sayin'.

I'm really still more disappointed by the fact that after 30-odd hours of buildup, we got this anticlimactic ending with an overly short and easy "suicide mission" and a preposterous "shoot the obvious bright orange weak spot" boss battle. I didn't think it was cool at all, glaring scientific inaccuracy or not.

Not necessarily, we just haven't advanced far enough.

In 1500 AD, based on scientific knowledge at the time, Jet engines, going to the moon, submarines, lasers, etc were impossible for them, but the only thing stopping them was that they were not advanced enough, and they hadn't learned to create the necessary materials.  The same is true today

[Mokthr]

wow, to all these people who are complaining how "scientifically incorrect" the game is, i hope you never play a JRPG, would probably make your heads explode. I mean really, its a game.

[Tooneyman]

Not everyone has played the terminator boss before. Some people have. I played contra myself so I knew about it, though it didn't bother me. ME 2s still a good game even thoguh its got a crappy boss. I'm looking forward to ME 3 because we get to fight a couple of reapers.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Gotta love watching Bucky make a fool of himself.

[Gill Kaiser]

JKoopman wrote...
even Harbinger is an exact copy of Sovereign

lolwhat, no it isn't. Harbinger has two carapace crests as opposed to Sovereign's one, a different number of legs, and its legs are oriented completely differently from Sovereign's.

Modifié par Gill Kaiser, 14 avril 2010 - 12:14 .

[TheLostGenius]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

dude TL;DR

someone summarize him for me

His problem with human reaper is because he doesn't find it scientifically plausible and in general feels that ME2 ruins the standard set for scientific accuracy in ME1.

I agree human reaper is of course massively stupid but there's no such thing as scientific accuracy in this universe it's all a bunch of stupid psuedo science bullsh*t just like every other sci-fi series.

I mean the genre is called science fiction because the fictional stories are centered around the discovery or invention of technology and how that technology effects the world of the story. The term has precisely nothing to do with how realistic the technology in the story may or may not be.

Mass effect core, and mass effect drive are the scientific explanation for all technology in Mass Effect.

[TheLostGenius]

Gill Kaiser wrote...

JKoopman wrote...
even Harbinger is an exact copy of Sovereign

lolwhat, no it isn't. Harbinger has two carapace crests as opposed to Sovereign's one, a different number of legs, and its legs are oriented completely differently from Sovereign's.

Let's not forget one thing. Sovereign was heterosexual.

[Solomen]

Mordin's explanation of human genetic variance makes sense if you read the codex. The other species have hit genetic bottlenecks. The same thing happened to cheetahs on earth. Every cheetah on earth is nearly a clone of every other cheetah because they lack genetic variance. You can graft skin from one onto the other and its immune system won't know the difference.

[TheLostGenius]

Solomen wrote...

Mordin's explanation of human genetic variance makes sense if you read the codex. The other species have hit genetic bottlenecks. The same thing happened to cheetahs on earth. Every cheetah on earth is nearly a clone of every other cheetah because they lack genetic variance. You can graft skin from one onto the other and its immune system won't know the difference.

Just because we can evolve more doesn't mean were better.

[Solomen]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Solomen wrote...

Mordin's explanation of human genetic variance makes sense if you read the codex. The other species have hit genetic bottlenecks. The same thing happened to cheetahs on earth. Every cheetah on earth is nearly a clone of every other cheetah because they lack genetic variance. You can graft skin from one onto the other and its immune system won't know the difference.

Just because we can evolve more doesn't mean were better.

It means we don't suffer from the same genetic defects and can adapt better to new environments.  If a disease kills a cheetah there is a good chance it will kill every cheetah.  If a disease kills a humans there is a good chance a few will be immune.

[TheLostGenius]

Solomen wrote...

TheLostGenius wrote...

Solomen wrote...

Mordin's explanation of human genetic variance makes sense if you read the codex. The other species have hit genetic bottlenecks. The same thing happened to cheetahs on earth. Every cheetah on earth is nearly a clone of every other cheetah because they lack genetic variance. You can graft skin from one onto the other and its immune system won't know the difference.

Just because we can evolve more doesn't mean were better.

It means we don't suffer from the same genetic defects and can adapt better to new environments.  If a disease kills a cheetah there is a good chance it will kill every cheetah.  If a disease kills a humans there is a good chance a few will be immune.

You watch 12 monkey's too much. You could consider indoctinration to be techno-biological warfare, on the Reapers part.

[Solomen]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Solomen wrote...

TheLostGenius wrote...

Solomen wrote...

Mordin's explanation of human genetic variance makes sense if you read the codex. The other species have hit genetic bottlenecks. The same thing happened to cheetahs on earth. Every cheetah on earth is nearly a clone of every other cheetah because they lack genetic variance. You can graft skin from one onto the other and its immune system won't know the difference.

Just because we can evolve more doesn't mean were better.

It means we don't suffer from the same genetic defects and can adapt better to new environments.  If a disease kills a cheetah there is a good chance it will kill every cheetah.  If a disease kills a humans there is a good chance a few will be immune.

You watch 12 monkey's too much. You could consider indoctinration to be techno-biological warfare, on the Reapers part.

I don't think I've watched 12 monkeys... at least not all the way through.  I just happen to be ocd when it comes to medical technology  

[Bucky_McLachlan]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

dude TL;DR

someone summarize him for me

His problem with human reaper is because he doesn't find it scientifically plausible and in general feels that ME2 ruins the standard set for scientific accuracy in ME1.

I agree human reaper is of course massively stupid but there's no such thing as scientific accuracy in this universe it's all a bunch of stupid psuedo science bullsh*t just like every other sci-fi series.

I mean the genre is called science fiction because the fictional stories are centered around the discovery or invention of technology and how that technology effects the world of the story. The term has precisely nothing to do with how realistic the technology in the story may or may not be.

Mass effect core, and mass effect drive are the scientific explanation for all technology in Mass Effect.

God I wish I could just punch people through my computer screen.

Honestly you are flat out retarded if you cannot separate technology from some sci-fi series you happen to find plausible from reality. It's called suspension of disbelief. Not a single one of these things is actually possible.

It's all make believe bullsh*t.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 14 avril 2010 - 01:07 .

[Necaria]

The difference between fiction and reality it that fiction has to make sense, enough said

[EvilIguana966]

A lot of people are discounting the possibility that a good deal of what the Reapers do is not done because they have to but rather because they want to.  The Reapers are not simple computer programs.  They are living entities with motives.  They believe that what they are doing is the right thing.  Harbinger talks about this whole process being akin to ascension to a new plane of existence.  They have a ritual, a religious practice if you will, that requires them to take the best that organic life has to offer, and to incorporate it into their offspring.  Creating a generic Reaper from cloned tissue might be possible, but it would defeat the whole purpose of their existence. 

[FlyingBrickyard]

Archereon wrote...


Not really, so long as his implants were comprehensive enough to function without him being alive, its somewhat plausible.  

Not according to real science, but within the framework they laid out for the game, absolutely.

Honestly, I think I was more "upset" with the whole "Space Zombies" thing in the first 10 minutes of the game (aka, Husks).

I never really "got" zombies as an enemy - I think I'm probably the only person in the world that thinks they're fairly lame.  When I saw them for the first time in ME1, I'm pretty sure I rolled my eyes, because it seemed like another phoned in, cliched and done to death "but the fanboys love them" enemy.

Fortunately I'd heard enough good about the game to stick with it beyond the first bits of Eden Prime, and while I still think Husks are a remarkably stupid enemy and hands down the dumbest thing in the series, the rest of the game is so good I'm willing to overlook them.

And if I can overlook Husks, I can forgive a LOT of things.

[Fluffeh Kitteh]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

Masticetobbacco wrote...

I don't think anyone here gives a sh.it about "lulz scientifically plausible". They are rather disappointed with such a failure boss battle.

Obviously you did not read the OP.

dude TL;DR

someone summarize him for me

His problem with human reaper is because he doesn't find it scientifically plausible and in general feels that ME2 ruins the standard set for scientific accuracy in ME1.

I agree human reaper is of course massively stupid but there's no such thing as scientific accuracy in this universe it's all a bunch of stupid psuedo science bullsh*t just like every other sci-fi series.

I mean the genre is called science fiction because the fictional stories are centered around the discovery or invention of technology and how that technology effects the world of the story. The term has precisely nothing to do with how realistic the technology in the story may or may not be.

Mass effect core, and mass effect drive are the scientific explanation for all technology in Mass Effect.

That still doesn't make it believable though.

The word scienctific should be treated loosely here, not something that implies concrete, believable fact. After all, science fiction is just fantasy, with the magic replaced by sciency terminologies

[Solomen]

FlyingBrickyard wrote...

Archereon wrote...


Not really, so long as his implants were comprehensive enough to function without him being alive, its somewhat plausible.  

Not according to real science, but within the framework they laid out for the game, absolutely.

Honestly, I think I was more "upset" with the whole "Space Zombies" thing in the first 10 minutes of the game (aka, Husks).

I never really "got" zombies as an enemy - I think I'm probably the only person in the world that thinks they're fairly lame.  When I saw them for the first time in ME1, I'm pretty sure I rolled my eyes, because it seemed like another phoned in, cliched and done to death "but the fanboys love them" enemy.

Fortunately I'd heard enough good about the game to stick with it beyond the first bits of Eden Prime, and while I still think Husks are a remarkably stupid enemy and hands down the dumbest thing in the series, the rest of the game is so good I'm willing to overlook them.

And if I can overlook Husks, I can forgive a LOT of things.

Haven't you played Bowling for Husks with vanguard shockwaves