931 réponses à ce sujet

[II Sl4sh3r II]

Alexein wrote...

TheZanSnake wrote...
.

The
matter of the fact is that, even though you bought the game doesn't
mean you have to carry one playing it. It isn't like someone is pointing
a gun to your head everytime you turn you Xbox or PC on and demanding
you to play it. It is YOUR choice.

oh PLEASE, SAVE
your excuses, you people make ME sick. I'M trying
to keep the crappy science in games from eroding whatever intellect we HELD.  
On some level I agree witH- the original pOSTer 
that in a sci-fi universe you want something that is at least
plausible. This isn't dragon -AGE  where the world
is supposed to fake, this is "the future" where things are extrapolated
based on whAT we know now. I expect a  GUN to
be POINT  AND  shoot just like the present and not some
magical wand that i MUST chant to make work....

I'm
sorry, i'm being a jack*ss i'll try  to  KEEP civil.
Anyway when i'm PLAYING MASS EFFECT i don't want
scientific inconsistencies to bother me.

Before anyone gets
angry at me please only regard the words i bolded ,capitalized and
underlined.

I see what you did there...

Anyway...

smudboy wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Kinda
funny, prior to ME2 the ME forums were filled with intelligent debates
like this one over technicalities and what's possible and what's not,
and it was great, gave people something to chat over while waitin for
the next game.

now it's like 4chan. Super.

We even
have images when people are so flabbergasted to be able to come up with
an appropriate response.  This is usually due to people 1) being narf,
2) misunderstanding English.

I see both sides, I see 4chan wannabes being immature and I see intelligent conversation. But you have to understand, we're arguing about an event from a fictional universe. We have very little data on what actually happened. Some of you are trying to use todays technology to prove that it's not possible, and some of you are just plain making stuff up. There is no way to prove anything unless we get more fictional data from Bioware. The only way I see this getting resolved is some DLC that gives us insight. Yes we got to go back to the Normandy crash site but that showed us nothing.

Was he really burning up in the atmosphere?

Did the explosion from the normandy propel him to 11,000 mph?

Did he land a Tempur-Pedic mattress?

We don't know. The reason people get so bitter about these debates is because some people take it to the extreme and do not give up. I don't see smudboy giving in at all. Even after someone from Bioware replied to what he had stated, smud still actively denies that it was possible for him to survive. How do you debate with someone who is dead set on it being total BS?

No offense intended smud, you're just the most avid disbeliever I've seen.

[KainrycKarr]

Alexein wrote...

If ya hate ME2 so much.... how about just not play it?

I hate Justin Bieber... so I don't listen to him.

And if you're complaining that you already bought the game... well it's your fault for not checking a spoiler first. You should have taken better steps to protect yourself if you're SO mentally fragile that a bad story would shatter your delicate emotional balance and perspective on reality, forever damaging your sanity and causing you rant endlessly on forums like some... raving...luna...tic...


oh wait a minute.... (looks in mirror).... ah crap....

Uh, who complained that they bought it? I've stated pretty clearly that I loved and continue to love playing ME2. I just wish a few things had been written better. Is that so hard to comprehend?

[Omicrone]

I'm linking an article here that might be of interest: The Lazarus Bug

[II Sl4sh3r II]

Omicrone wrote...

I'm linking an article here that might be of interest: The Lazarus Bug

Haha.. I meant to look up "Lazarus" the other night. I should have...

Edit: However I believe that the argument here is that his body would be non-existent. Therefore, rendering any amount of technology useless.

Modifié par II Sl4sh3r II, 20 juillet 2010 - 07:54 .

[KainrycKarr]

Raizo wrote...

You people are still argueing about this!?!

MobiusTyr wrote...

go get laid.

My friend here is genius.

Some of us having an appreciation for deep and believable storytelling has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's sex life, porn stars.

Hit puberty and learn to debate an idea without resorting to lame insults.

[Omicrone]

Turns out it does carry copies of DNA that helps it repair its genome. Even so, the theory is still plausible - towards the end of the article the scientists talk about resurrecting dead neurons which is an obstacle the Lazarus team are facing in ME2.

[KainrycKarr]

Omicrone wrote...

I'm linking an article here that might be of interest: The Lazarus Bug

See, now, this is the kind of stuff I can talk about. This is the sort of thing that bridges the gap between "bullcrap" and "hey, what will they be able to do with this in 200 years?"

[Onyx Jaguar]

iirc, that was one of the things discussed in the logs



But I could be wrong

[Simpfan]

smudboy wrote...
 After all, futuristic technology is just like magic.

I think this thread is over now.

[Onyx Jaguar]

It would appear as from the Gods, or Magical to those who have not had precedent of viewing it. Which is why Science Fiction often can mirror fantasy as you have to reach for the stars so to speak in both mediums.

[Peepshow12]

Bringing someone back from the dead is the part you have a problem with when it comes to realism?



Not the blue alien chicks who can join their mind with any alien race they come across as part of a mating ritual and throw s***t across the room with it as well?



Not the legion of giant robo-squid ships sitting on the edge of the galaxy waiting until they can harvest the entire place of organics so they can feed their GIANT ROBO-BABIES?



Yeah ok that's your thing. More power to you and what not.

[KainrycKarr]

Peepshow12 wrote...

Bringing someone back from the dead is the part you have a problem with when it comes to realism?

Not the blue alien chicks who can join their mind with any alien race they come across as part of a mating ritual and throw s***t across the room with it as well?

Not the legion of giant robo-squid ships sitting on the edge of the galaxy waiting until they can harvest the entire place of organics so they can feed their GIANT ROBO-BABIES?

Yeah ok that's your thing. More power to you and what not.

Nobody flippin' reads. These things you state are at least given SOME kind science FICTIONAL explanation, whereas the resurrection does NOT.

[smudboy]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
We don't know. The reason people get so bitter about these debates is because some people take it to the extreme and do not give up. I don't see smudboy giving in at all. Even after someone from Bioware replied to what he had stated, smud still actively denies that it was possible for him to survive. How do you debate with someone who is dead set on it being total BS?

No offense intended smud, you're just the most avid disbeliever I've seen.

Excuse me, but I would appreicate you leave out speculation to my character.  I have no problems admitting when I am wrong, or am presented evidence that obviously proves my opinion to be false.  I understand the storytelling elements in the first 10 minutes of the game, and others do, too.  Whereas I and you see a number of errors, others simply believe it.  That's good for them. In this situation, there will be no clear cut answer, as you yourself have stated.  This is clearly an error in storytelling.

However, to others who think not, their response is "it's sci-fi", I have to ask "sci-fi what?"  There are many ways to make us believe Star Trek transporters work, even alien Star Trek transporters.  They have a sci-fi/magical device that transports people.  It's a physical room if you will.

Compare that to resurrecting Shepard.  They have an entire station dedicated to resurrecting Shepard.  That's good.  They have a number of audio logs, and some people involved. That is good.

However, the transporter device is a one room, obviously complicated piece of sci-fi equipment, that we see its effects and results.  There are details, moving parts, lights, switches, techno babble, etc.  Shepard does not have a resurrection device.  The technobabble is limited to false at best.  Shepard was not resurrected with eezo, or some magical literary ME device that would even begin to make us comprehend it.

The narrative simply tells us "you were dead, you're back."  With no clear explanation on how Shepard died, what state they were in post-resurrection, and what brought them back.  There was no thematic use of resurrection (like a soul searching scene, or character exposition.)

So excuse us if you can't handle our opinions on what is clearly a poor method of storytelling, a flaw in writing, a bad use of plot device, unclear exposition, and one of the larger errors in the narrative.

[II Sl4sh3r II]

smudboy wrote...

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
We don't know. The reason people get so bitter about these debates is because some people take it to the extreme and do not give up. I don't see smudboy giving in at all. Even after someone from Bioware replied to what he had stated, smud still actively denies that it was possible for him to survive. How do you debate with someone who is dead set on it being total BS?

No offense intended smud, you're just the most avid disbeliever I've seen.

Excuse me, but I would appreicate you leave out speculation to my character.  I have no problems admitting when I am wrong, or am presented evidence that obviously proves my opinion to be false.  I understand the storytelling elements in the first 10 minutes of the game, and others do, too.  Whereas I and you see a number of errors, others simply believe it.  That's good for them. In this situation, there will be no clear cut answer, as you yourself have stated.  This is clearly an error in storytelling.

However, to others who think not, their response is "it's sci-fi", I have to ask "sci-fi what?"  There are many ways to make us believe Star Trek transporters work, even alien Star Trek transporters.  They have a sci-fi/magical device that transports people.  It's a physical room if you will.

Compare that to resurrecting Shepard.  They have an entire station dedicated to resurrecting Shepard.  That's good.  They have a number of audio logs, and some people involved. That is good.

However, the transporter device is a one room, obviously complicated piece of sci-fi equipment, that we see its effects and results.  There are details, moving parts, lights, switches, techno babble, etc.  Shepard does not have a resurrection device.  The technobabble is limited to false at best.  Shepard was not resurrected with eezo, or some magical literary ME device that would even begin to make us comprehend it.

The narrative simply tells us "you were dead, you're back."  With no clear explanation on how Shepard died, what state they were in post-resurrection, and what brought them back.  There was no thematic use of resurrection (like a soul searching scene, or character exposition.)

So excuse us if you can't handle our opinions on what is clearly a poor method of storytelling, a flaw in writing, a bad use of plot device, unclear exposition, and one of the larger errors in the narrative.

Well to be perfectly honest I think the fact that the whole operation is called "The Lazarus project" and the fact that

Omicrone wrote...
I'm linking an article here that might
be of interest: The Lazarus Bug

exists today and is named "Lazarus" is hardly a coincedence. I know it might not be common knowledge but I also don't believe that they have to spell every little detail out for us.

I also don't understand how the fact that we see the Star Trek transporters doing something makes it more believable. I saw Shepard being injected with some fluid that seemed to bring the dead cells back to life. I also saw them connecting little clamps to his bones to reconnect them and allow them to heal. How is that any less believable then the Star Trek transporters? The only difference is you see the transporters used more often. There is no explaination as far as I know.

Modifié par II Sl4sh3r II, 20 juillet 2010 - 08:51 .

[eternalnightmare13]

Thanks for taking the fun out of the game...

Ksandor wrote...

You can't bring Shepard back from dead -- it is impossible.

If you are brain dead your neurons and neural pathways and protein based memory molecules decompose. Since nobody knows what protein based memories and neural pathways Shepard had in life reconstructing them is impossible (you can't reconstruct memories and the personality).

Besides quantum mechanics says 100% reproduction is impossible. Especially when it comes to a complex system like a thinking brain. Unless there was some sort of hibernation mechanism in Shepard's suit reviving a brain dead person is impossible.

If I were Bioware I would create circumstances where Shepard's brain could be salvaged more or less intact. At least they did not clearly state that Shepard fell to the planet. No "body" can survive that. Simple impact would pulverize the body even if the atmosphere does not contain oxygen so the body would not burn. Maybe Shepard's body was in orbit and his body suit's emergency systems preserved him to some degree. Any specifics about this in Redemption comic?

The solution would be to imply that Shepard's body recovered from orbit and the suit protected him from extreme decomposition -- especially an emergency mechanism which protected his brain. This would not directly conflict with Jacob when he said Shepard was dead as dead can be and Miranda when he summarizes the extensive damage Shepard suffered. If your brain is preserved bringing you back from dead should be possible with future tech.

I wish they just said that Shepard was in comma for 2 years. That was the most plausible solution but Bioware wanted to scandalize audience with this flashy death idea so instead they have chosen this Hollywood no brainer. They should retcon this without conflicting Mass Effect 2.

[Tooneyman]

Last bit of argument. The planet is cold. Bioware it was a clumsy move on your writers part to not include this simple detail on your writing. This one factor along with the shepards shields would explain a lot. The idea of Jacob saying you where meat and tubes is a little far fetched. Everyones body is mean and when your regenerating someone you are going to stick tubes into them. Now lets go back to the cold part when the body is cold it goes into a state of Hybernation before it dies. Now to this day we still don't know if people can be brought back from actual death yes. The problem with the theories is it gets into the idea of souls and if Shepard would still be the same as s/he was. The writers make it out to be, but a from a religious stand point thats poppy seeds.

As for the planet being cold and shepards body being preserved through the environment and s/he body being sealed in the suit. It is possible in that kind of future to bring them back. I mean right now we are learning that you can suck the water of out a being at a certain about of time and they are literally considered 99.99% dead, but in fact if you put enough of the right proteins and water back into the body as a certain rate the being can by scientific theory be brought back to life. There is a bug/organism which does this and doesn't come back to life for about a good 10000 years to a 1000. This creature is real and so are its facts. Don't believe me google it!

[smudboy]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...
Well to be perfectly honest I think the fact that the whole operation is called "The Lazarus project" and the fact that

Oh, so the title of something explains it?  Thanks.  That's really not helping any argument on anything.  WE KNOW it's a flippin project to resurrect Shepard!  What, should I start reading the bible now?!

Omicrone wrote...
exists today and is named "Lazarus" is hardly a coincedence. I know it might not be common knowledge but I also don't believe that they have to spell every little detail out for us.

Nonsense.

I don't want every little detail, I want enough details to make me go "Oh, so that's how his brain get preserved?"  I'm trying to UNDERSTAND the narrative.  Throwing science my way and going "blahblahblahblah" means NOTHING.

You're making excuses for the narrative by quoting stuff no one has knowedge or competency of.

I also don't understand how the fact that we see the Star Trek transporters doing something makes it more believable. I saw Shepard being injected with some fluid that seemed to bring the dead cells back to life. I also saw them connecting little clamps to his bones to reconnect them and allow them to heal. How is that any less believable then the Star Trek transporters? The only difference is you see the transporters used more often. There is no explaination as far as I know.

Because we CAN POINT TO IT.

We can go "Look, it's that thing that transporrts things!"

As opposed to ME2's resurrection, we can't do JACK.

[RiouHotaru]

Looks, the devs have confirmed for us that Shepard fell into the planet, and smacked the ground at a rather significant velocity, rendering him/her completely and totally dead.



Exactly how they put you back together is inconsequential, evidence all states they did it, with 4 billion credits, the best technology and scientific minds they could find, and a bit of luck.



That's really all we need.

[II Sl4sh3r II]

smudboy wrote...

Oh, so the title of something explains it?  Thanks.  That's really not helping any argument on anything.  WE KNOW it's a flippin project to resurrect Shepard!  What, should I start reading the bible now?!

The title hints that they were using Lazarus microbes. It's the best explaination yet and you still deny it has anything to do with it?

Nonsense.

I don't want every little detail, I want enough details to make me go "Oh, so that's how his brain get preserved?"  I'm trying to UNDERSTAND the narrative.  Throwing science my way and going "blahblahblahblah" means NOTHING.

Throwing science your way.. means nothing... right.. gotcha.. Then it's because a magically fairy came down and took him away in a pumpkin with wheels.

You're making excuses for the narrative by quoting stuff no one has knowedge or competency of.

Obviously some people have competency of what the Lazarus microbe is.

Because we CAN POINT TO IT.

We can go "Look, it's that thing that transporrts things!"

As opposed to ME2's resurrection, we can't do JACK.

Uh, I believe I saw what the robotic arms were doing to Shepard at the beginning of the game. Just because we can't go back and see every bit of machinery isn't really a big deal.

I saw them inject him with, what I now believe is, the Lazarus microbes and most likely a variety of other drugs, which brought dead cells back to life.

I saw them using clamps to reinforce his bones.

I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend. Even without knowledge of what the microbe is, its not that unbelievable that in the future we'll have some drug that brings dead cells back to life.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I thought I put an end to this? What is wrong with you people?!

[Zulu_DFA]

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Oh, so the title of something explains it?  Thanks.  That's really not helping any argument on anything.  WE KNOW it's a flippin project to resurrect Shepard!  What, should I start reading the bible now?!

The title hints that they were using Lazarus microbes. It's the best explaination yet and you still deny it has anything to do with it?

No, I got the better explanation:

http://en.wikipedia....arus_Phenomenon

They just put whatever Shepard's the Blue Suns scratched off the Alchera surface, and waited until it woke up. 

[Raxxman]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Peepshow12 wrote...

Bringing someone back from the dead is the part you have a problem with when it comes to realism?

Not the blue alien chicks who can join their mind with any alien race they come across as part of a mating ritual and throw s***t across the room with it as well?

Not the legion of giant robo-squid ships sitting on the edge of the galaxy waiting until they can harvest the entire place of organics so they can feed their GIANT ROBO-BABIES?

Yeah ok that's your thing. More power to you and what not.

Nobody flippin' reads. These things you state are at least given SOME kind science FICTIONAL explanation, whereas the resurrection does NOT.

Um, no

Resurrection is far more likely than bipedal aliens that share fertility and body structure with us.

[jklinders]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

II Sl4sh3r II wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Oh, so the title of something explains it?  Thanks.  That's really not helping any argument on anything.  WE KNOW it's a flippin project to resurrect Shepard!  What, should I start reading the bible now?!

The title hints that they were using Lazarus microbes. It's the best explaination yet and you still deny it has anything to do with it?

No, I got the better explanation:

http://en.wikipedia....arus_Phenomenon

They just put whatever Shepard's the Blue Suns scratched off the Alchera surface, and waited until it woke up. 

So the rest of the money went to ...Miranda's wardrobe?

Close enough.

[Gorescream]

Pah, they probably know hell more about law&physics in 175 years, not to mention we know more about law&physics then 175 ago.

You might just never know.

Edit: added smiley face

Modifié par Gorescream, 20 juillet 2010 - 10:47 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

Raxxman wrote...
Resurrection is far more likely than bipedal aliens that share fertility and body structure with us.

I disagree unless your creating zombies or clones which don't count.