931 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

smudboy wrote...
Why: the writer wrote it as such.

I'm not certain I understand your meaning.

[JohnnyBeGood2]

smudboy wrote...

racerfox wrote...
Suspension of disbelief works when the ratio of retarded impossibility is balanced with simple, efficient, and effective telling. ME gets that balance right for the most part which is /exactly/ why it's held in such high regard.

1. No it doesn't.
2. Everything you said before is irrelevant.  Saying "it's sci-fi" means nothing.
We can all buy that Shepard was brought back IF they properly explained it/used proper literary devices.
They did not.

They did it for effect, not much else... because it doesn't have some spiritual/existential overtone doesn't mean it's bad... they just did it for effect ( ?? )

[Spornicus]

I for one did not mind the Shepard resurrection and did not have any problem enjoying the game because of one questionable scene.

[smudboy]

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

smudboy wrote...

racerfox wrote...
Suspension of disbelief works when the ratio of retarded impossibility is balanced with simple, efficient, and effective telling. ME gets that balance right for the most part which is /exactly/ why it's held in such high regard.

1. No it doesn't.
2. Everything you said before is irrelevant.  Saying "it's sci-fi" means nothing.
We can all buy that Shepard was brought back IF they properly explained it/used proper literary devices.
They did not.

They did it for effect, not much else... because it doesn't have some spiritual/existential overtone doesn't mean it's bad... they just did it for effect ( ?? )

1. I agree.
2. The fact they then had to live and deal with that effect, and it didn't have any exposition/depth/introspection is arguably a bad thing, and at least a wasted opportunity.
3. What's bad is the disconnect from everything else, and the unbelievability of it.  Because game play reigns supreme.

[pvt_java]

Spornicus wrote...

I for one did not mind the Shepard resurrection and did not have any problem enjoying the game because of one questionable scene.

I don't think anyone really didn't enjoy the game simply because of the beginning, except for maybe smudboy. Most of us are just saying that resurrecting Shepard is impossible simple scientific means - we still had fun with the game.
 

  It would have been WAY better if they had Liara or the Asari Consort had brought him back, even if he was still with Cerberus, if we learn the Asari had something to do with it then it becomes 100% more believable for me.

[rolson00]

does it really matter? the games out people love it theres nothing we can do about it. bioware cant take back that part and probs wouldnt even if they could

[Terraneaux]

pvt_java wrote...

  It would have been WAY better if they had Liara or the Asari Consort had brought him back, even if he was still with Cerberus, if we learn the Asari had something to do with it then it becomes 100% more believable for me.

..but the Asari don't have technology anything like that.  

Geth might have been more believable, honestly.  

There are all these 'underworld' names in ME2 (Cerberus, all the bar names, etc) and yet the main character doesn't go through anything like you would expect if you were doing an old 'journey through the underworld' kind of story.  I would have been down with it if there had been some, any, character development.  

[racerfox]

Some Geth wrote...

[
1. No it doesn't.
2. Everything you said before is irrelevant.  Saying "it's sci-fi" means nothing.

We can all buy that Shepard was brought back IF they properly explained it/used proper literary devices.

They did not.
.

1. Yes. It does. I don't know why you'd even bother to argue such obvious logic.

2. And it saying it's sci-fi does mean a lot, actually. If you don't need the other aspects I mentioned explained then focusing on Shepard's resurrection as a fault in storytelling is absolutely ridiculous. You can't say "It's ok that all aliens are somehow Bipedal BUT we don't get the science behind the Lazerus project explained so RETCON!"

They don't explain any of the science in detail. It's not important, and if you think it is then you're simply being a pedantic ass for the sake of it. :/

[Kitteh303]

Do any of you think that Jacob was lying, and Shepard really IS a clone?

Just throwing that out there. Is that a more reasonable explanation, in anyone's opinion?

[smudboy]

racerfox wrote...
1. Yes. It does. I don't know why you'd even bother to argue such obvious logic.

2. And it saying it's sci-fi does mean a lot, actually. If you don't need the other aspects I mentioned explained then focusing on Shepard's resurrection as a fault in storytelling is absolutely ridiculous. You can't say "It's ok that all aliens are somehow Bipedal BUT we don't get the science behind the Lazerus project explained so RETCON!"

They don't explain any of the science in detail. It's not important, and if you think it is then you're simply being a pedantic ass for the sake of it. :/

What obvious logic?  You wrote:
"Suspension of disbelief works when the ratio of retarded impossibility
is balanced with simple, efficient, and effective telling. ME gets that
balance right for the most part which is /exactly/ why it's held in
such high regard."

Where's the logic?  That's purely subjective.  Seriously, wtf is the ratio of retarded impossibility / effective storytelling?  Suspension of disbelief works when what we're seeing doesn't make us go "huh?"  It works only when storytelling is clear.  Clarity ensures we know exactly what the story is trying to show and tell us.

ME doesn't get that balance right at all.

I don't need science explained in order to understand how Shepard is revived.  But, because they're going the medical miracle route, and haven't explained anything, then that means there's a contemporary, science based solution.  They don't need to explain everything, but enough for me to point at something or someone and say "that caused it."  Therefore, some science at least is required.  And what techno jargon we get is blatantly wrong.

ME could be a fantasy story.  It makes no difference.  Proper storytelling technique, proper exposition are what matters.

I don't have to question that all aliens are bipdeal, because I can see some of them are.  They're right there.

I must question that Shepard was resurrected because I can't see or be told how they 1) died, 2) was preserved (especially the brain), and 3) was resurrected.  Now, sci-fi exposition could explain these things, but it wasn't explained well, and in some cases not at all.  Those're the obvious problems.

[Spornicus]

smudboy wrote...

racerfox wrote...

Suspension of disbelief works when the ratio of retarded impossibility is balanced with simple, efficient, and effective telling. ME gets that balance right for the most part which is /exactly/ why it's held in such high regard.

1. No it doesn't.
2. Everything you said before is irrelevant.  Saying "it's sci-fi" means nothing.

We can all buy that Shepard was brought back IF they properly explained it/used proper literary devices.

They did not.

Calm down, it's just sci-fi.

[Siansonea]

You want hard sci-fi? Read Arthur C. Clarke. You want a fun video game, play Mass Effect. It ain't rocket science.



Seriously, I just don't have the energy to sustain the level of indignation I see around here. 20 pages of "the science doesn't add up!" is a heck of an investment in a thread the developers will never see or care about.

[Il Divo]

smudboy wrote...
I don't have to question that all aliens are bipdeal, because I can see some of them are.  They're right there.

I think you're missing his point on this. No one is questioning that Mass Effect says all aliens are bipedal. But Mass Effect also says that this is an alternate reality from our own. I would like my alternate realities to be  semi-realistic in some regard. You're saying the resurrection breaks suspension of disbelief. For some of us, bipedal aliens which look, act, and feel remarkably human are no different. Nevermind the dozen or so other elements which Mass Effect doesn't bother to explain to us. I don't quite see how resurrection crossed the proverbial line.

Modifié par Il Divo, 29 juillet 2010 - 01:38 .

[jgomezish]

oh my science!

[smudboy]

Il Divo wrote...

smudboy wrote...
I don't have to question that all aliens are bipdeal, because I can see some of them are.  They're right there.

I think you're missing his point on this. No one is questioning that Mass Effect says all aliens are bipedal. But Mass Effect also says that this is an alternate reality from our own. I would like my alternate realities to be  semi-realistic in some regard. You're saying the resurrection breaks suspension of disbelief. For some of us, bipedal aliens which look, act, and feel remarkably human are no different. Nevermind the dozen or so other elements which Mass Effect doesn't bother to explain to us. I don't quite see how resurrection crossed the proverbial line.

If you say there is an alien object over there, and point to it, I believe you.

If you say there is a fantastical procedure for creating matter out of thin air, and there's a machine that does that and you can point to it (with proper explanation), I believe you.

If you say there is a method for resurrecting the dead, but you can't explain it to me, or point to any objects that conduct said activity, or account for the various states of death, preservation and resurrection, or the state of the person and any differences or symptoms suffered from it, then I cannot believe you.

[JohnnyBeGood2]

smudboy wrote...

JohnnyBeGood2 wrote...

smudboy wrote...

racerfox wrote...
Suspension of disbelief works when the ratio of retarded impossibility is balanced with simple, efficient, and effective telling. ME gets that balance right for the most part which is /exactly/ why it's held in such high regard.

1. No it doesn't.
2. Everything you said before is irrelevant.  Saying "it's sci-fi" means nothing.
We can all buy that Shepard was brought back IF they properly explained it/used proper literary devices.
They did not.

They did it for effect, not much else... because it doesn't have some spiritual/existential overtone doesn't mean it's bad... they just did it for effect ( ?? )

1. I agree.
2. The fact they then had to live and deal with that effect, and it didn't have any exposition/depth/introspection is arguably a bad thing, and at least a wasted opportunity.
3. What's bad is the disconnect from everything else, and the unbelievability of it.  Because game play reigns supreme.

I'll agree there was room for something more and I'd also typically expect some "personal development" from such an event, but yep as you say: game play reigns supreme.

What it did do is give paragons a reason to be patient with TIM for ME 2.

[SmokePants]

Resurrecting Sheperd is more believable than faster than light travel. In fact, if you have a faster than light spacecraft, you have a time machine, and you could go back and prevent Sheperd from dying.

[jklinders]

Siansonea II wrote...

You want hard sci-fi? Read Arthur C. Clarke. You want a fun video game, play Mass Effect. It ain't rocket science.

Seriously, I just don't have the energy to sustain the level of indignation I see around here. 20 pages of "the science doesn't add up!" is a heck of an investment in a thread the developers will never see or care about.

Well you're sure doing your part to keep the thread alive aren't you?

[sweety_petey]

 I say he's a Time Lord who used a chameleon arch to become a human and escape the Time War, and when he "died" all Cerberus did was temporarily turn him into a Time Lord (or at least get his regeneration going again) and get him to regenerate. But since he had used his chameleon arch, and thus wasn't technically a Time Lord, it took longer then normal.

Modifié par sweety_petey, 29 juillet 2010 - 02:18 .

[Mecha Tengu]

SmokePants wrote...

Resurrecting Sheperd is more believable than faster than light travel. In fact, if you have a faster than light spacecraft, you have a time machine, and you could go back and prevent Sheperd from dying.

and see yet that is all fine. Suspension of disbelief please.

Who honestly cares about the plausibility of ressurection in a science FICTION video game? You're here to have fun, not to bit.ch and whine that someone else's imagination is "too unrealistic lol!"

[Khirzask]

C-, would not read again.

[MobiusTyr]

Christ, the bioware forums are just one big nurd breeding ground. Get the flame thrower... I have some nurds to torch.

[obiewamkenobi89]

Its a Science Fiction Game, everything is possible. give it a break

[smudboy]

obiewamkenobi89 wrote...

Its a Science Fiction Game, everything is possible. give it a break

EVERYTHING.

[ADLegend21]

why was this revived?