931 réponses à ce sujet

[KainrycKarr]

Bah f*ck it, I don't care any more. It's too late to change anything. Noone's gonna change my mind and i'm not changing your minds.

But consider this; how important, emotional, and relevant is the death of an important character in a story, when you introduce the fact that it can be totally retconned because "oh but wait! they can bring him back to life!"

Yeah. Right up there with time travel. You just don't care when someone dies if you know they could be brought back to life.

Feel free to keep replying to me, but I'm done and backing out of this conversation, as it is clearly going nowhere.

Modifié par KainrycKarr, 20 juillet 2010 - 04:03 .

[Inquisitor Recon]

thegreateski wrote...

Exactly. And it felt so good saying that. I can understand why the turian counciler likes to dismiss everything.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I doubt it.

[wolfstanus]

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.

1.  He was persevered in spehc! Also they have technology and biological advances that surpass us by centuries.

2.You know today’s science has been proven wrong time and again so yeah. Going by what some scientists says can't be done by our current understanding does not mean we can't do it in say 200 years from now. Also science in ME was jumped a few hundred if not thousands of years ahead of time by what they found on mars.

3. Its their game they can say Shepard had decided to have a sex change and make it into part of the resurrecting Shepard story and there would not be a thing we can say about it. Why? because its their game. Also they don't say all you find is his helmet which could of landed near the Normandy simply because it fell with the rest of the ship.

4. In ME if you red the codex it says decompression is a myth. As in that universe is different from ours. Also he was in spehc!

5. Well that’s your opinion. Not everybody’s. As one famous person said once "Everybody has an opinion and they all think theirs matters." Also this is a sci-fi game it does not need to be based on our reality for this is science fiction.

I know im late on this but.... I felt like posting this anyways.

[KainrycKarr]

wolfstanus wrote...

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.

1.  He was persevered in spehc! Also they have technology and biological advances that surpass us by centuries.

2.You know today’s science has been proven wrong time and again so yeah. Going by what some scientists says can't be done by our current understanding does not mean we can't do it in say 200 years from now. Also science in ME was jumped a few hundred if not thousands of years ahead of time by what they found on mars.

3. Its their game they can say Shepard had decided to have a sex change and make it into part of the resurrecting Shepard story and there would not be a thing we can say about it. Why? because its their game. Also they don't say all you find is his helmet which could of landed near the Normandy simply because it fell with the rest of the ship.

4. In ME if you red the codex it says decompression is a myth. As in that universe is different from ours. Also he was in spehc!

5. Well that’s your opinion. Not everybody’s. As one famous person said once "Everybody has an opinion and they all think theirs matters." Also this is a sci-fi game it does not need to be based on our reality for this is science fiction.

I know im late on this but.... I felt like posting this anyways.

...i know i promised to back out of this discussion but...



lolwut?

[Teknor]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Bah f*ck it, I don't care any more. It's too late to change anything. Noone's gonna change my mind and i'm not changing your minds.

You couldn't explain what made mental domination plausible but resurrection implausible. Worst of all you came up with weak analogy of apples and oranges to divert the issue. You failed.

[Teknor]

Double post.

Modifié par Teknor, 20 juillet 2010 - 04:48 .

[KainrycKarr]

Teknor wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

Bah f*ck it, I don't care any more. It's too late to change anything. Noone's gonna change my mind and i'm not changing your minds.

You couldn't explain what made mental domination plausible but resurrection implausible. Worst of all you came up with weak analogy of apples and oranges to divert the issue. You failed.

Actually, it just depends on your interpretetation of mental domination.

Psychologically, mental domination is quite possible, and there are many theories on how to accomplish it. Technologically....not so much.

now, find me some real, credible theories on bring a person back to life, long after all organs have ceased to function and begun to decay, exactly as they were at the time of death.

Find me a real, credible source for a theory on how to accomplish this, and i'll happily accept that bringing the dead back to life is just as plausible as mental manipulation(indoctrination)

And, again, I will re-iterate; Indoctrination is a result of in-story ALIEN AND UNKNOWN TECHNOLOGY. Thus there would BE no explanation for how it works until somebody breaks the tech down and analyzes it.

The resurrection is a result HUMAN MADE technology, and thus there is NO reason why it couldnt be granted a simple conversation or two and maybe even a cozy little codex entry, if only for reference sake.

Modifié par KainrycKarr, 20 juillet 2010 - 05:12 .

[ObserverStatus]

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

[thegreateski]

This thread has been dismissed . . . . with finger quotes even!



We're done here.

[KainrycKarr]

bobobo878 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

look, the issue is NOT getting the brain started, it's having it contain the SAME neurological patterns and thought processes(personality) that it had at the time of death.

[wolfstanus]

KainrycKarr wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

look, the issue is NOT getting the brain started, it's having it contain the SAME neurological patterns and thought processes(personality) that it had at the time of death.

Its called scfi (science fiction)

[KainrycKarr]

wolfstanus wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

look, the issue is NOT getting the brain started, it's having it contain the SAME neurological patterns and thought processes(personality) that it had at the time of death.

Its called scfi (science fiction)

Yes, so where's the science that is fictional? I'm not asking for an airtight thing. It doesnt even have to be real. Just a mention of "so we finally figured out the key to doing it is blah blah..."

Just something a little more immersive than "hey look we can bring the dead back to life now isn't that cool!"

The difference between fantasy and scifi is that scifi has explanations for why things are the way they are; fantasy does not. fantasy just attributes everything to magic.

So is ME sci-fi, or fantasy?

Modifié par KainrycKarr, 20 juillet 2010 - 05:35 .

[Kijin]

Quite frankly, I don't really think an explanation is needed. I'm of the opinion that you should only criticize a game based on the advertising. Neither the original game nor the sequel advertised itself as being a realistic Science Fiction epic. The presence of Biotic powers (which are never explained in great detail) as well as the completely ridiculous biology of the alien races demonstrates that realism was never all that important to them when designing the lore of Mass Effect.



If the game was never intended to be realistic, and if it was never advertised as being realistic, then there is no need to criticize it for not being realistic. This does not make any such criticism is wrong; in fact, I agree with most of the complaints that KainrycKarr and others have been stating. What this does mean is that any critique of the lack of realism in Mass Effect 2 is irrelevant.



I could criticize Mass Effect 2 for not being a Real Time Strategy Game, and I would be correct. It's not an RTS - but the game was never advertised as being one, so why bother? It seems like a waste of energy.

[Neo Hex Omega]

I do think the death of Shepard was a needless gimmick that wasn't used for any satisfactory payoff in the story.



Has it killed my enjoyment of the game? No, and perhaps having no explanation for how it worked is better than having an explanation that just makes no sense.



Would I rather Bioware have avoided resorting to Deus Ex Machina? Yes, but, well, I have no control over that.



The only thing that will make me flip my lid is if we find out in ME3 that Shepard really isn't the same person she died as, i.e., a clone.

[ObserverStatus]

KainrycKarr wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

look, the issue is NOT getting the brain started, it's having it contain the SAME neurological patterns and thought processes(personality) that it had at the time of death.

That still seems more plausable than losing weight by sticking a tesla coil in dark matter.

Modifié par bobobo878, 20 juillet 2010 - 06:02 .

[Massadonious1]

Let's just call it for what it is. You all want to know to satisfy your own personal curiosity, because quite honestly, I fail to see why your character needs to know or why knowing would be important to the story.



And besides, anything they put in the codex would of been woefully insufficient anyway. People would still come here to debate the scientific merits, or lack thereof of the whole thing.

[KainrycKarr]

Man, my complaints have been fairly straightforward.



Did I still still buy Me2? Yes. I in fact pre-ordered the CE, knowing about the thing I'm complaining about.



Did i still vastly enjoy it? Absolutely. In spite of my issues and complains. ME2 is still an amazing game and way ahead of the competition in terms of story and gameplay both.



My issue is that when ME1 first came out, I personally felt it had a far more realistic touch than nearly any other sci-fi game or story I'd come across in recent times. But with ME2 and such a common and ill-conceived gimmick as death/back to life, it felt to me like the franchise took a turn for the far more generic path of being just another scifi story with inexplicable gimmicks and cool graphics.



From a story perspective, it's still great in spite of Shep's death. My primary issue with the resurrection isn't even the resurrection itself; it's that it is now technologically possible to bring a "dead-as-dead" person back to life without any seeming complications other than cost, which with practice and time would go down.



The idea that a character as majorly important as Shepard can die is actually a very gritty and immersive point for the story. But the fact that he was brought back to life takes away from death in this universe.



So what if saren died? he was dead as dead too. Maybe the reapers come up with a resurrection themselves and rebuild saren from some sample they have somewhere.



The issue is that if someone dies; so what? they can come back.



Death is no longer a big deal in ME because of the resurrection, and to me, that breaks my immersion, and thus takes away from my enjoyment of the game.



That said - I love the game and the franchise, and hope ME3 is as good as it's predecessors.

[Simpfan]

Its just a game dude

[KainrycKarr]

bobobo878 wrote...

KainrycKarr wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Mass effect fields are more plausible than bringing Shepard back from dead. You just don't understand how complex brain is. As Penrose stated in Emperor's New Mind reconstructing a brain is impossible. You may have the fastest quantum computer out there and still it would not be enough. Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty makes sure of that. You just don't understand the scientific implications here. I can suspend disbelief for mass effect fields but not for resurrecting people. This is science fiction dammit not epic fantasy! Why not retcon it? Star Wars does, Star Trek does why Bioware should not?

By that logic, it should be impossible for the human brain to form in development, and yet, it does.   To reconstruct the brain many mechanical obstacles would have to be overcome, but do we really have any reason to believe that running an electric current through condensed dark matter would reduce the mass of everything around it ?  Almost nothing is known about the stuff, and I doubt that Bioware's guess as to it's properties being accurate is far less probable than the brain being reconstructed give centuries of medical advancement.

look, the issue is NOT getting the brain started, it's having it contain the SAME neurological patterns and thought processes(personality) that it had at the time of death.

That still seems more plausable than losing weight by sticking a tesla coil in dark matter.

Actually bending matter and space is quite possible, with the use of singularities. Issue is, you'd have to provide a HUGE amount of space around the singularity to keep it from overwhelming and absorbing every bit of matter within it's gravitational pull, while still feeding it enough mass to maintain itself.

[KainrycKarr]

Simpfan wrote...

Its just a game dude

Yes, and when I play a game I enjoy immersion.

Of course it's just a game; I'm just posting my opinion for the sake of curiousity and making my own gaming experience better.

If you don't care, don't post. There are plenty of other threads to choose from.

Modifié par KainrycKarr, 20 juillet 2010 - 06:10 .

[Bluko]

Well I prefer to think of it this way...

Shepard was dead, but not dead-dead.




Anyways I can see Shepard being rebuilt assuming he didn't fall through the atmosphere of whatever that planet was. Sorry I forget. But even I can't dimiss that falling through a planetary atmosphere there be anything left of Shepard. Every nerdy neuron in my brain just screams in horror at the thought of this being possible, unless Shepard is actually a Gundam.

What I generally believe happened was Shepard got exposed to the vacuum of space from his suit puncture and was just about instantly frozen. I can see Shepard being salvagable if he was basically frozen, although yes oxygen depravation probably would have destroyed his brain. Also to me it looked like Shepard's body was severely frozen, since nasty frostbite will turn any extremity into something black withered. As for the skeletal damage I'll just blame all the various debris for that.

[KainrycKarr]

As I said earlier, the material used for the shuttle is actually very lightweight and not that expensive(you can actually buy the stuff over here at Kennedy SC), and as such not to hard to think it would be built into armor and whatnot as a simple safety redundancy.



So surviving the atmosphere itself isn't all that implausible.