6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Kharkov]

 A long time ago (in a galaxy far far away, noo stop, sorry), a young actor, I think it was Clint Eastwood, but could be wrong (feel free to correct), was asked a very simple question, the question was this -
 
 How do you decide what film scripts to accept ?
 
 He answered like this -
 
 I never accept a film script in which the main hero charactor dies.
 
 Now, bearing in mind that Clint Eastwood at this time was planning on a very long and successful acting carear (I assume), it tends to suggest that he understood that a Hero charactor, and the aura of invincibility and righteousness could transcend whatever film story he was currently placed in, he seemed to understand that the viewers belief in his Hero status could (and would) transfer from film to film.
 
 It also suggests that Clint Eastwood considered Death as finality, once death has occurred, regardless of its placement in time, the Hero status, the aura of invincibility and the mystery are gone, forever.
 
 Now, what I find strange is that a young actor, starting out in his carear, can understand this, but a team of writers working on a game script cannot.
 
 Your getting bogged down in the details, the details of a mistake thats already been made, your trying to shut the stable door, after the horse has bolted.
 
 They broke a golden rule, they killed the Hero, and what makes it worse, is the fact that they did it simply for dramatic effect, the plot of the film, oops sorry game, does not require the death of shepard at the start.
 
 ps, No I dont want to argue about whether Clint Eastwood has died in a film, if you on the other hand do, then you just massively missed the point.
 

 

Modifié par Kharkov, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:01 .

[dreman9999]

Soul Cool wrote...

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.

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.

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.

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.

1.The pieces are still going the same speeds as every part of the ship. Even if the parts of the ship brake up, I does not change the course of fall dramatically nor slows the parts of the ship down. Weight has no reliance too object going the same speed and direction
2.Compact satellites can(Guess you did see that Harvard lecture on youtube,too). Do you see any small parts in the normady crash site?

[dreman9999]

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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?

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?

So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before performing the cutting operations?

If you say so...

How would they know who it is with out checking?
Also, they use a stasis field to keeps his body perserved after taking him out.

[111987]

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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?

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?

So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before performing the cutting operations?

If you say so...

How would they know who it is with out checking?
Also, they use a stasis field to keeps his body perserved after taking him out.

...what?

Come on, you're really grasping at straws here. Shepard is the only person with N7 armor on the Normandy. They knew it was him.

I have no idea what your argument about the stasis field is. I reiterate MY point which you did not address; "So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and
left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before
performing the cutting operations?"

[Notlikeyoucare]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dreman9999 has surpassed Fixers0..

Congrats.. a new record.

I never thought that was possible. Boy was I wrong

[dreman9999]

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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?

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?

So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before performing the cutting operations?

If you say so...

How would they know who it is with out checking?
Also, they use a stasis field to keeps his body perserved after taking him out.

...what?

Come on, you're really grasping at straws here. Shepard is the only person with N7 armor on the Normandy. They knew it was him.

I have no idea what your argument about the stasis field is. I reiterate MY point which you did not address; "So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and
left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before
performing the cutting operations?"

But how would body armor brake of agenist carbon?

[Soul Cool]

dreman9999 wrote...
1.The pieces are still going the same speeds as every part of the ship.

Explosion force slows individual pieces down and speeds others up. The pieces would have to be affected by it, or you've basically invalidated the entire idea of what an explosion does.

Even if the parts of the ship brake up, I does not change the course of fall dramatically nor slows the parts of the ship down.

All of the pieces would have different weights, drag coefficients, and starting velocities. They would all be dramtically different.

Weight has no reliance too object going the same speed and direction

Size does, and mass does, too. They'd all 'fall' at different speeds because that's how the math works. They can't all fall the same because they don't all have the same descending characteristics.

2.Compact satellites can(Guess you did see that Harvard lecture on youtube,too). Do you see any small parts in the normady crash site?

I didn't even know Harvard was working on low-orbit vehicles. This is not the point.

Modifié par Soul Cool, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:22 .

[TuringPoint]

The stasis field is a collector technology. This would mean someone working for the Collector's found the body, who had that technology.  According to the comics that would fit the Shadow Broker's agents.

Also, if they had recovered the body to revive or study it, experiment, use it, they wouldn't want or need the armor. They might even plant the broken armor on purpose to make it appear there is no way Shepard survived.

That said, if the fall did break the armor, however much energy and torque was required to do that would be that much less energy impacting on Shepard's body.

Modifié par Alocormin, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:26 .

[111987]

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

111987 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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?

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?

So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before performing the cutting operations?

If you say so...

How would they know who it is with out checking?
Also, they use a stasis field to keeps his body perserved after taking him out.

...what?

Come on, you're really grasping at straws here. Shepard is the only person with N7 armor on the Normandy. They knew it was him.

I have no idea what your argument about the stasis field is. I reiterate MY point which you did not address; "So they cut Shepard's armor open right on the surface of Alchera, and
left it there? They didn't wait to even get him on the shuttle before
performing the cutting operations?"

But how would body armor brake of agenist carbon?

It would break against the ice/rock on Alchera.

[TuringPoint]

There was also the explosion, and lots of debris floating around.

[Someone With Mass]

They kept Shepard's body in a stasis pod (it's common technology, apparently) in the Redemption comic to prevent further degeneration.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:28 .

[Deganis76]

In regards to Smudboy, I only have 1 thing to say:

Somebody has a lot of free time on their hands...

[100k]

Deganis76 wrote...

In regards to Smudboy, I only have 1 thing to say:

Somebody has a lot of free time on their hands...

This thread is 186 pages long. Anyone who comes in here is at risk of having the same said about them.

[Arkitekt]

Kharkov wrote...


 A long time ago (in a galaxy far far away, noo stop, sorry), a young actor, I think it was Clint Eastwood, but could be wrong (feel free to correct), was asked a very simple question, the question was this -
 
 How do you decide what film scripts to accept ?
 
 He answered like this -
 
 I never accept a film script in which the main hero charactor dies.

(...)


 ps, No I dont want to argue about whether Clint Eastwood has died in a film, if you on the other hand do, then you just massively missed the point.
 

 

Actually it is you who missed the ****ing point. Clint always decided to not be "killed" as an actor (and thus decided not to enter "Once Upon a Time in the West" where he would be killed instead of Fonda) only to not have his own image "killed" in the public's mind. He had his own career in mind, not any "golden rule" of writing that you just made up in your mind and pretend it has some kind of existence outside of it.

[Killjoy Cutter]

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.

It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. 

It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

[Arkitekt]

iakus wrote...

It's a problem because Shepard's ressurection is, to the vast majority of the galaxy an  impossibility.  And the only answer we get to how this impossibility is in fact possible is "stuff happens" and "it was really expensive"  

I never got to see this "impossibility" written in the galactic faces. All I see is some surprised faces to find someone they thought dead not to be so. Will you please stop making **** up? I warned you against this n times already.

Umm, that's not all we need to know.  "It was really expensive" could explain building a new Normandy (okay that and swiping the plans for it)
"It was really expensive" could explain more mundane cybernetics.
"It was really expensive" could explain bringing a couple of high end mercenaries on board like Zaeed and Kasumi
It was really expensive works for making the difficult happen.  Or the unlikely.  To make the impossible happen, you need more.  You need a process.  A discovery, an X-factor that says "this is no longer possible.  Now it's just difficult.  Or unlikely"

Who's this "we" you are speaking for? Who has named you a speaker for this alledged group of mammals? It's all you should need to know, since the sequence of events that don't end up with Shepard's brain like a gello is non zero, and multiple people have produced a series of possibilities that explain why this is so. If you have been distracted, don't complain.
However, there is a very curious contrast with another detail of Mass Effect 2. We get 100 pages of discussion (and I bet multiple ones in different places) on how this lack of exposure was "Bad" somehow, albeit it was about something clearly in the real of the possible, and yet when ME2 shows something that we know a 100% to be unscientific, people even admire the game for it because it is so filled with technobabble. I'm speaking of quantum entanglement as a means of instant communication. Let's all forget for a moment that this method is a 100% impossible method to provide real time communication around the universe (How I wished it to be true when I imagined it ten years ago when I learned the experiment for the first time...) and just pretend that Mass Effect is really giving us the real science here.

[KotorEffect3]

I hate this thread

[aznricepuff]

Arkitekt wrote...

iakus wrote...

It's a problem because Shepard's ressurection is, to the vast majority of the galaxy an  impossibility.  And the only answer we get to how this impossibility is in fact possible is "stuff happens" and "it was really expensive"  

I never got to see this "impossibility" written in the galactic faces. All I see is some surprised faces to find someone they thought dead not to be so. Will you please stop making **** up? I warned you against this n times already.

Umm, that's not all we need to know.  "It was really expensive" could explain building a new Normandy (okay that and swiping the plans for it)
"It was really expensive" could explain more mundane cybernetics.
"It was really expensive" could explain bringing a couple of high end mercenaries on board like Zaeed and Kasumi
It was really expensive works for making the difficult happen.  Or the unlikely.  To make the impossible happen, you need more.  You need a process.  A discovery, an X-factor that says "this is no longer possible.  Now it's just difficult.  Or unlikely"

Who's this "we" you are speaking for? Who has named you a speaker for this alledged group of mammals? It's all you should need to know, since the sequence of events that don't end up with Shepard's brain like a gello is non zero, and multiple people have produced a series of possibilities that explain why this is so. If you have been distracted, don't complain.
However, there is a very curious contrast with another detail of Mass Effect 2. We get 100 pages of discussion (and I bet multiple ones in different places) on how this lack of exposure was "Bad" somehow, albeit it was about something clearly in the real of the possible, and yet when ME2 shows something that we know a 100% to be unscientific, people even admire the game for it because it is so filled with technobabble. I'm speaking of quantum entanglement as a means of instant communication. Let's all forget for a moment that this method is a 100% impossible method to provide real time communication around the universe (How I wished it to be true when I imagined it ten years ago when I learned the experiment for the first time...) and just pretend that Mass Effect is really giving us the real science here.

Simple answer: the general populace isn't smart enough to know that you can only send quantum information via entanglement-assisted quantum teleportation. It's the same reason why they don't care that the idea of mass effect fields allowing for FTL travel (even assuming mass effect fields work the way they're supposed to in-universe) is equally ludicrous if you know anything about relativity.

[Nashiktal]

dreman9999 wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Dremen you have no idea what I am talking about do you?

I'm not talking about reaper indoctrination, I am talking about plain old hacking, which reapers DO. If they didn't, EDI wouldn't exist.

For shep to be hackable, his body has to communicate, broadcasting a signal. If its broadcasting a signal, the reapers can see it. If the reapers can see it... Beep Boop, sheps been hacked! Congragulations, shep just lost because no one told him his implants are talking!

He hacks using HIS OMNI TOOL. Not his implants.

Also when you upgrade sheps implants, you don't give it software, you are giving him surgery. What did you think bone and skin weaves were software upgrades?

I know reapers hack...I'm just saying they are worst things they can do then  hacking you....That wouldn't be able to control you through the hacking.

And it's not his omni tool he's hacking with. Remeber....you can hack things and as a soldier.....Where do you think you get the training of it from?

Are you trolling me Dremen? Are you seriously telling me that whether or not you have an omni tool depends on your class? Its not. No matter your shep, you have an omni tool. Why in the world do you think that soldier shep doens't have one?

Reapers can do all sorts of crap to shep, however if they want him alive as harbinger keeps insisting, then when the reapers arrive they can just hack shep just like that. Indoctrination takes time, and apparently tranqs and invisible cords can't hold him down.

Its a blaring weakness. This is a fact. To ignore any weakness when facing ANCIENT GOD MACHINES FROM BEYOND DARKSPACE is pure folley.

No, I'm not. I'm saying how can a pure soldier hack a door with an omni-tool with no training.

And ofcourse it's a weakness. The whole reason why the reapers did not invade from ME1 is because they underestamated their tergets.

You don't hack doors, you bypass them. You have terminals. Its a gameplay thing, not based on sheps skills. If you actually think its his implants then you are being silly. Just like with how you thought sheps implant upgrades were software updates. >.>

So you admit its a weakness? So you admit that Miranda messed up big time for not telling shep about it? Even if the reapers don't do it, shep does fight geth fairly regularly. Besides you are missing the point.

Sheps body can be hacked, which means cerberus built something inside him that communicates with the outside world.

Its a problem, it should have been at least mentioned once throughout the story. ME2's story is a mess mate.

Bypassing is hacking.

Well at least this is another knock against you. Bypassing is not hacking . I think someone needs to learn what hacking is.

[Halo Quea]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

I hate this thread

Not enough to stay away from it 

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I've played / sat through that opening many times, and there's no way I missed a ship turning into a planet! 

Then you need to look again.

At no point in that video does a ship turn into a planet!  


And if you watch the final death of the Normandy, you'll see that there's no way that it could have come down in that neat little spot on the surface.  The major remaining segments are moving apart at significant velocity.  If they had even come down to the surface in two years, they would have come down scattered across the planet. 

5:33.....What is the sphereical black thing in the right bottom of the sceen? A planet. Where isthe normandy heading?Right.
6:05...What's above shepards head?.... A planet.
6:52....Where is the normady falling into?......A planet.
....

Yes, I've watched the video.  Several times.  Where does the ship turn into a planet?    (He's not getting it, is he?)


As for the Normany, it doesn't fall, it's blown into many pieces.  If you don't understand the Normany flying apart as shown in the video you posted, in the scene we've all seen so many times, makes it impossible for the all those pieces to land within a few hundred meters of one another, that's just more proof that you don't grasp the most basic of the concepts you're blathering on about. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Not that it makes any difference what side of the planet he landed on, mind you. There is no way that Shepard could have been cryogenically preserved, because it's simply not possible in the "wild." Only in a highly controlled environment with special chemicals.

Again. I'm not saying his Shepard was cryo frozed. I'm saying his body was mummified in a state like it. Simmilar to frozen fossils and frozen mummies...http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/photogalleries/mummy-pictures/

Ever get a look at the physical state of the brains of "freezedried" mummies?  

Have you?
The point is they are dead but the bodies did not decay. And thats where the other point of my argument is. Cellural damage is mute ifyou can rebuild the cells.  That why I keep stating they rebuilt the cells with reaper tech....AKA, the nano tech used to make husk.

Yes, I have seen the state of those brains, and no amount of "restoring cells" would ever bring those people back.  No amount of "restoring cells" will ever bring back the personality and memories of anyone whose brain has been damaged to that degree, or to the degree that it seems Shep's was.  Too much of what someone is, is in the PATTERN of the cells, the connections and the overall structure.  Restoring individual cells won't bring a person back. 

Shep's brain was not crypreserved -- it was starved of oxygen, slammed into a planet, and then slowly, sloppily frozen and exposed to a very thin atmosphere. 

(PS:  methane and methanol are not the same thing.)

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Actually, bypassing is like hotwiring a car or picking a lock.  It's creating physical connections between points in the circuitry.  Read the codex and watch the way it works when you're playing the game. 

What it's not, is hacking. 

It's exactly what it's named. Bypassing. 

You're bypassing the security messures in order to open whatever it is that you're bypassing. In the hacking stage, it looks like you're gathering bits of data to assemble a password in order to unlock the system. You're attacking the system head on. That's not what happens when you're bypassing stuff.

We're saying the same thing, I think. 

[Iakus]

Arkitekt wrote...

I never got to see this "impossibility" written in the galactic faces. All I see is some surprised faces to find someone they thought dead not to be so. Will you please stop making **** up? I warned you against this n times already.

Okay, name me a race or organization in the ME universe that has ressurection technology besides Cerberus?  Heck name one that's even trying to invent it.  Thus why Reaper tech is one fo th efew halfway plausible answers out there.  The reason so few people are suprised is because they assume Shepard never died in the first place.  That the reports were mistaken or Shep faked his death to go work for Cerberus.  They're not thinking "Oh, he must have been brought back from the dead with the power of SCIENCE!" because that's clearly not possible.  Or at least, it wasn't before.
 

Who's this "we" you are speaking for? Who has named you a speaker for this alledged group of mammals? It's all you should need to know, since the sequence of events that don't end up with Shepard's brain like a gello is non zero, and multiple people have produced a series of possibilities that explain why this is so. If you have been distracted, don't complain.
However, there is a very curious contrast with another detail of Mass Effect 2. We get 100 pages of discussion (and I bet multiple ones in different places) on how this lack of exposure was "Bad" somehow, albeit it was about something clearly in the real of the possible, and yet when ME2 shows something that we know a 100% to be unscientific, people even admire the game for it because it is so filled with technobabble. I'm speaking of quantum entanglement as a means of instant communication. Let's all forget for a moment that this method is a 100% impossible method to provide real time communication around the universe (How I wished it to be true when I imagined it ten years ago when I learned the experiment for the first time...) and just pretend that Mass Effect is really giving us the real science here.

"We" would be me and anyone else who happens to agree with me.  We're a very informal society who's sole purpose is to ruin your Mass Effect experience, you know;)

And if this was a Mario Brothers game, I can accept that the 1-Up mushroom gives me an extra life.  In a complex interactive universe such as the Mass Effect galaxy, I need more than that.  Shooting mercs and accumulating random bad****es can only distract me for so long.

And while some ideas have been floated on how brain tissue may have been preserved (with greater and leser degrees of plausibility) Nothing tells me how the brain and its personality got back online.  How does a brain go from zero to fully functioning with no side effects?   Because whatever condition the brain was in after the crash, it was nonfunctional.  Do you know how we know this?

Because Shepard was dead!.  Not pining.  He's passed on!  The commander was no more!  He's ceased to be!  He's expired and gone to meet his Maker.  He's a stiff!  Bereft of life, he rests in peace!  If they hadn't nailed him to the table he'd be pushing up the daisies!  His metabolic process were history!  He's off the twig!  He's kicked the bucket, he's shuffled off his mortal coil run down teh curtain and joined teh bleeding choir invisible!  He's effing snuffed it!  This is an ex-Spectre!

With apologies to Monty Python.

And if you think I'm "making stuff up" Everything about the Lazarus Project down to its' very name says so!  If in ME3 it turns out Shepard was never really dead, it will be either the biggest twist or the biggest copout in gaming history

[dreman9999]

Soul Cool wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
1.The pieces are still going the same speeds as every part of the ship.

Explosion force slows individual pieces down and speeds others up. The pieces would have to be affected by it, or you've basically invalidated the entire idea of what an explosion does.

Even if the parts of the ship brake up, I does not change the course of fall dramatically nor slows the parts of the ship down.

All of the pieces would have different weights, drag coefficients, and starting velocities. They would all be dramtically different.

Weight has no reliance too object going the same speed and direction

Size does, and mass does, too. They'd all 'fall' at different speeds because that's how the math works. They can't all fall the same because they don't all have the same descending characteristics.

2.Compact satellites can(Guess you did see that Harvard lecture on youtube,too). Do you see any small parts in the normady crash site?

I didn't even know Harvard was working on low-orbit vehicles. This is not the point.

Think of it like this way.  Let say you drop a ball down a building and a strong wind blows up the build to the ball.....3 things could happen......The balls fall would slow down, the ball would suspend in the air if the wind is strong enough, or the ball would shoot back up. This happens because the wind provides force that overwhelms  the balls  fall. What determines what happens is the gravitational pull of the ball, the speed of the ball and the power of force of the wind. To slow the ball, the wind needs to use some force on it. To suspend the ball, the wind need apply equal force on the ball and maintain it. To turn the ball, the wind need to exceed the force of the falling ball.
 That the same concept of the Normandy falling to the planet. Now you say the explosion may have kept it in orbit....But to know that we need to know the strength of force of explosion and the speed of the Normandy. The Normandy is a ship that move at very fast speeds and the ship was trying to escape and did not slow down. So that mean it moving at high speeds. And it being pulled into a planet. So it's speed is going faster..
Now if the explosion was to stop the Normandy from falling, it would have to counter the amount of force the ship is going and then maintain it due to the gravity of the planet. No you may argue that can be lock in sub orbit, to do that it need to be put in a cretin angle and arch at considerable speed the takes time to slow down and need to be light in weight.... Now he ship is going straight to the planet....At high speeds with the speed increasing due to gravity....That explosion not only has to be considerable but constant so pieces of  that ship does not get overwhelmed by the force of the planet. Add in the fact that the explosion happened in the center of the ship, mean the force would shoot it multiple directions and they are in sub orbit, which has a higher gravitational pull then being in orbit. That ship would not be able to stay in orbit it any way with that explosion.
Now, if your say it should of landed in different places....I agree, that is when the weight of the objects are considered.