Ce sujet est fermé
Isn't this the same intro people used to say it's impossible for Shepards body to servive the fall. So when it's ued to support the fact his body servived.....It can't be used?Fixers0 wrote...
Someone With Mass wrote...
Wait, the prologue had a lack of context, even if we can clearly see what's going on?
Poort writing and awfull storytelling?
And what do we actually see, just bunch of explosions and some characters that make you want to rage out about their dumb character behavior.
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
Fixers0 wrote...
At least i don't insult people for not understanding the poor quality of the main narative or the lack of contexts in Mass Effect 2
Someone With Mass wrote...
I think the BioWare designers were aware that a crash site with such low spread will never occur, but they wanted to make the Normandy Crash Site DLC contain as many tidbits of memories and significant icons of the Normandy as possible without having to land all over the place.
Because in reality, you'd be lucky if you found the Mako and the remains of the CIC on the same side of the planet. Or on the planet at all, for that matter.
Someone With Mass wrote...
Awful storytelling?
Someone With Mass wrote...
I thought the way they told the story was rather clear. I just don't agree with all of the content of that story.
The ship is in several pieces, all with different speed and directions due to the explosion. Please try to understand this simple concept, it is not that hard.dreman9999 wrote...
1.How is a damage ship with no engines going to mantian orbit in sub orbit? Do you not notice the ship has no way to make propulsion?
Please stop saying this. You are demonstrably lying.2. THAT IS HOW ORBIT WORKS.
Because it doesn't have sufficient speed, right. I totally agree, thanks for proving me right. I'm glad we agree that you simply need to attain sufficient speed at any height above sea level to orbit a planet.Every satellite on this planet is at or more than 100 km from the planet surface. Any thing less fall into the planet.
No, I don't, because you're demonstrably inapable of understanding this. You have either deliberately lied or misiniterpreted things to suit your needs so that you can 'prove' what you want to be true is true. You have been incorrect on many of your main points, if not all of them. If you cannot understand what I am attempting to tell you because it does not suit your needs, this is fine, but don't try to act like what you're saying is even remotely factual.If you insist on this, I would need you to show me a satellite that is in orbit less then 100 km.
Modifié par Soul Cool, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:29 .
Fixers0 wrote...
Oh yeah the story is so clear that we all just accept that a dead guy who fell into a planet comes back to live, or not.
Sgt Stryker wrote...
It also had to be playable on foot. I turned my brain off when I started shooting open crates to obtain dog-tags.
I have no problem with suspension of disbelief. I just have a problem with people trying to argue that it's realistic and easily explainable.Someone With Mass wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Oh yeah the story is so clear that we all just accept that a dead guy who fell into a planet comes back to live, or not.
Most people do.
It's called suspense of disbelief.
Someone With Mass wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Oh yeah the story is so clear that we all just accept that a dead guy who fell into a planet comes back to live, or not.
It's called suspense of disbelief.
Soul Cool wrote...
I have no problem with suspension of disbelief. I just have a problem with people trying to argue that it's realistic and easily explainable.Someone With Mass wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Oh yeah the story is so clear that we all just accept that a dead guy who fell into a planet comes back to live, or not.
Most people do.
It's called suspense of disbelief.
Soul Cool wrote...
I have no problem with suspension of disbelief. I just have a problem with people trying to argue that it's realistic and easily explainable.
1. And they are all going the same direction....What is the counter force to stop the debree from falling into the planet? The ship has no engines to provied it, so it has none. Think of the normandy as a arrow shot forward from a bow. The arrow keeps going in the air till it starts falling to the ground. It fall to the ground because it lacks the force to say in the air. That that same consept of a ship that can't stop.Soul Cool wrote...
The ship is in several pieces, all with different speed and directions due to the explosion. Please try to understand this simple concept, it is not that hard.dreman9999 wrote...
1.How is a damage ship with no engines going to mantian orbit in sub orbit? Do you not notice the ship has no way to make propulsion?Please stop saying this. You are demonstrably lying.2. THAT IS HOW ORBIT WORKS.
Because it doesn't have sufficient speed, right. I totally agree, thanks for proving me right. I'm glad we agree that you simply need to attain sufficient speed at any height above sea level to orbit a planet.Every satellite on this planet is at or more than 100 km from the planet surface. Any thing less fall into the planet.
No, I don't, because you're demonstrably inapable of understanding this. You have either deliberately lied or misiniterpreted things to suit your needs so that you can 'prove' what you want to be true is true. You have been incorrect on many of your main points, if not all of them. If you cannot understand what I am attempting to tell you because it does not suit your needs, this is fine, but don't try to act like what you're saying is even remotely factual.If you insist on this, I would need you to show me a satellite that is in orbit less then 100 km.
Modifié par dreman9999, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:42 .
Alocormin wrote...
To be honest, we don't actually see him crashing to the planet's surface, only entering the atmosphere. He may have skimmed the atmosphere.
Fixers0 wrote...
Alocormin wrote...
To be honest, we don't actually see him crashing to the planet's surface, only entering the atmosphere. He may have skimmed the atmosphere.
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Better however would have been if they use a fictional or a litterary explanation for this case, or not have him die at at all as i has abosulty no impact on the narative.
Modifié par NeroSparda, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:45 .
Then they would have a 6 hour cut scene explaining all the detail of the game and braches of sciense that they got the details of the science in the game from. That why they have a codex. ME1 has it, ME2 has it, DA:O, DA2, JE, KOTOR, and BG.Fixers0 wrote...
Alocormin wrote...
To be honest, we don't actually see him crashing to the planet's surface, only entering the atmosphere. He may have skimmed the atmosphere.
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Better however would have been if they use a fictional or a litterary explanation for this case, or not have him die at at all as i has abosulty no impact on the narative.
Fixers0 wrote...
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Modifié par Alocormin, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:52 .
Alocormin wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Actually, an implication doesn't need to be spelled out to be an implication. The very nature of an implication requires two parties filling in the gaps. There was no reference to Shepard hitting the surface of the planet, only exposure to space was mentioned in Miranda's logs. Therefore, it is one possible implication that Shepard never touched the surface of the planet. That it was more dramatic to see Shepard hitting the atmosphere in the distance. That's subjective, but that's what fiction is.
Modifié par Alocormin, 16 septembre 2011 - 09:55 .
I know. You are either misunderstanding or deliberately misinterpreting what I am saying. I am saying that the ship will land like it did under any circumstances. It cannot be done in a realistic manner. The explosions removed the ship's ability to 'stay together' in any sort of atmospheric entry. The pieces don't have the same amount of weight, don't suffer from the same drag coefficient, or have the same starting velocity. They cannot have landed together like that. It does not work.dreman9999 wrote...
1. And they are all going the same direction....What is the counter force to stop the debree from falling into the planet? The ship has no engines to provied it, so it has none. Think of the normandy as a arrow shot forward from a bow. The arrow keeps going in the air till it starts falling to the ground. It fall to the ground because it lacks the force to say in the air. That that same consept of a ship that can't stop.
17,580 (Not exact, but very close approximation) miles per hour is the required speed to orbit the planet with a relavitely dense, compact satellite at 85km above sea level. It is possible. Please stop pretending it isn't.2.If you can show me a satillite that can maintain orbit less then 100 km, then we have something to take about. I ask his because they are know satilite in sub orbit andevery satiliteis in orbit. This is a gravitational low usedin real life, if you can't show it to me but expect me to believe that this it how it works then you have know grounds to say this it how it works.
Who ever said the fall broke the armor? Remeber, some one had to get the body. Is it impossible that they may have cut off the armor and taken off the helmet to get to Shepards body?111987 wrote...
Alocormin wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Actually, an implication doesn't need to be spelled out to be an implication. The very nature of an implication requires two parties filling in the gaps. There was no reference to Shepard hitting the surface of the planet, only exposure to space was mentioned in Miranda's logs. Therefore, it is one possible implication that Shepard never touched the surface of the planet. That it was more dramatic to see Shepard hitting the atmosphere in the distance. That's subjective, but that's what fiction is.
Then why is Shepard's helmet on the planet? And why is his armor cracked/in pieces, if not from impact?
111987 wrote...
Alocormin wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Actually, an implication doesn't need to be spelled out to be an implication. The very nature of an implication requires two parties filling in the gaps. There was no reference to Shepard hitting the surface of the planet, only exposure to space was mentioned in Miranda's logs. Therefore, it is one possible implication that Shepard never touched the surface of the planet. That it was more dramatic to see Shepard hitting the atmosphere in the distance. That's subjective, but that's what fiction is.
Then why is Shepard's helmet on the planet? And why is his armor cracked/in pieces, if not from impact?
dreman9999 wrote...
Who ever said the fall broke the armor? Remeber, some one had to get the body. Is it impossible that they may have cut off the armor and taken off the helmet to get to Shepards body?111987 wrote...
Alocormin wrote...
Fixers0 wrote...
Sure we don't see but that's logically assumed, if the writers wanted to imply that, then they had to make that clear,
Actually, an implication doesn't need to be spelled out to be an implication. The very nature of an implication requires two parties filling in the gaps. There was no reference to Shepard hitting the surface of the planet, only exposure to space was mentioned in Miranda's logs. Therefore, it is one possible implication that Shepard never touched the surface of the planet. That it was more dramatic to see Shepard hitting the atmosphere in the distance. That's subjective, but that's what fiction is.
Then why is Shepard's helmet on the planet? And why is his armor cracked/in pieces, if not from impact?
Retour en haut