6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Arkitekt]

You don't know for how long the oxygen still within his suit can last. Perhaps, even despite the holes, for some minutes still.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Phaelducan wrote...

No, we don't know that. The human brain has never been recovered and recreated to the extent we are referencing. It is entirely possible that if the brain had any intact anything left, given the short amount of time, Lazerus could have completely restored Shep to the state they were in before the attack.

You "know" nothing in this case, it's all conjecture and theoretical, and you are applying 20th/early 21th century medicine and science as your basis.

I would offer the friendly suggestion of some reading on the neuranatomy of memory.  We know enough right now to know that memory isn't in DNA, and you can't restore someone's memory with cloned neurons. 

Memory is information.  That information is not stored in the DNA.  That information is stored across billions of neurons and in minute structural details of the brain.  When the brain is lost, so is the information. 

The idea of cloning someone and getting their memories back in the clone is kinda cool, but based on what we know right now, it's less possible than FTL. 


The argument that Shep's brain isn't as damaged as statements by Wilson, Miranda, et al, make it sound, is a much more productive argument for those who want to defend the story as is --  at least that provides a path to plausibility.  Cloned neurons do not. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Arkitekt wrote...

You don't know for how long the oxygen still within his suit can last. Perhaps, even despite the holes, for some minutes still.

Given the leakage we see and Shep's panic reaction and then going limp, significant oxygen remaining in the helmet is highly implausible.  Not impossible, but so very, very implausible. 

[Arkitekt]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Given the leakage we see and Shep's panic reaction and then going limp, significant oxygen remaining in the helmet is highly implausible.  Not impossible, but so very, very implausible. 

Very well, point taken.

[Killjoy Cutter]

didymos1120 wrote...

TIM: "This is a relic from a battle that was waged when mammals took their first steps upon the Earth."

Of course, TIM was a bit off there: the origin of mammals dates back to around 200 million years ago. Not that that matters as far as the derelict's age goes.

I wince every time TIM says that... 

[Phaelducan]

Xeranx wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

A sample size of 2500 is pretty good. Is it the whole population? Of course not, which is why any kind of polling isn't exact, but you do get a pretty good sense of where approval ratings lie with a sampling of 2500. Anything over 1000 is usually considered scientifically valid (again, with the understanding that there will be margin of error, usually 3-5%). You are saying we can't use ANY industry measurables since they aren't accurate. That's false. Can we use them to 100% verify what the entire 6 million or so population thinks of the game? Of course not, but we can get a VERY good idea of what most people think by looking at review aggregates from both users and reviewers. Sometimes you get skewed results (like with DA2 and user reviews) but overall it's a pretty good tool. For that matter, there are fairly small deviations even within a sample size of 100 for most consumer products.

You are trying to throw out data because you don't like it. Stop that. 

I'm saying if there were industry measurables (standards) for reviews then it would be fine to use them, but there aren't any standards of review despite your claims that there are.  So to keep insisting that there are standards is false.  To call a silent majority ("millions of people agree" - usually the most invoked statement) when that majority can't be accounted for - because the polling is not conducted for any real measure of the population that bought the game and it's entirely voluntary - is also false.

You're trying to use a standard that doesn't exist and therefore can't be relied upon to back up your claims. You're also telling me a sample size of 2500 is good, but you didn't pick a sample size or decide on your margins for error.  Nor were any review sites collating data for the specific task of measuring customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction so that you could use it for any accurate measure.  What good is the data you bring forth if at least these factors exist and can ruin your results?

I'm not throwing data out because I don't like it as you claim.  I'm throwing data out because without any parameters for how you arrived at your claims any data you present is useless.  9 out of 10 people think Smudboy is a saint.  How did I arrive at that result?  What methods did I use?  Is it true or do I use it simply because it fits with my stance?  If I can't answer both questions in bold my claim in italics is worthless and only my latter statement can be considered and it would be summarily thrown out on the grounds of it being an opinion rather than a statistical fact.

So, again, please stop using this in your arguments.

/facepalm Stop, just stop. The effing data IS there, there IS an industry standard. You are being obstinate on purpose. You want to believe it's MORE likely that the 90% approval rating is false and that we are looking at a +/- 50% margin of error? Fine believe it. That's absolutely idiotic, but go ahead and believe it.

I'd rather go with a +/- 5% and assume that of the thousands of sampled reviews, about 80% minimum are positive, and we can be 95% confident that the if we asked another 50k people, or 500k, or 5 million, that the standard deviation would fall within that range.

Believe what you want, I'm done talking about stats and reviews. I'm tired of arguing with ostriches who refuse to take their heads out of the sand. So ok, you want to be right? Go ahead and think that the 90% approvals are all false, lying, and can't be counted, and that it's more plausible that everyone else thinks the game sucks. Bully for you.

[Arkitekt]

Cloning the brain's memory is however, slightly more plausible than FTL. Specially if you expect FTL to come from dark energy or some other bull**** mechanic ;-).

Let's put it this way: If FTL really became possible (in the strict physical sense, of travelling faster than light in space), then it would become possible to go to the past (has to do with the maths of it). This should be impossible, for then an all too great number of impossible paradoxes come to fruition. There is only two loopholes that I can remember, one through the making of wormholes (and the maths of it are really depressing), and two through the distortion of space itself (while you can't travel faster than light in space, space itself can "travel" any speed it wants, there are no limits), but the energy required is literally astronomical (really, really impractical in any scifi scenario).

[Phaelducan]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

No, we don't know that. The human brain has never been recovered and recreated to the extent we are referencing. It is entirely possible that if the brain had any intact anything left, given the short amount of time, Lazerus could have completely restored Shep to the state they were in before the attack.

You "know" nothing in this case, it's all conjecture and theoretical, and you are applying 20th/early 21th century medicine and science as your basis.

I would offer the friendly suggestion of some reading on the neuranatomy of memory.  We know enough right now to know that memory isn't in DNA, and you can't restore someone's memory with cloned neurons. 

Memory is information.  That information is not stored in the DNA.  That information is stored across billions of neurons and in minute structural details of the brain.  When the brain is lost, so is the information. 

The idea of cloning someone and getting their memories back in the clone is kinda cool, but based on what we know right now, it's less possible than FTL. 


The argument that Shep's brain isn't as damaged as statements by Wilson, Miranda, et al, make it sound, is a much more productive argument for those who want to defend the story as is --  at least that provides a path to plausibility.  Cloned neurons do not. 

I already said he wasn't cloned. You are talking about cloning the brain, I'm not. I'm saying that if the brain isn't completely destroyed, it could be restored. The tissue could be partially cloned, but you wouldn't have to start from scratch, as the memories would still be intact. Yeah, we can't do it now, but ME2 isn't now.

[Iakus]

Phaelducan wrote...

Which is why to enjoy science fiction, one generally has to give writers some benefit of the doubt. Without concrete evidence showing us that Shep can't be resurrected, I trust the writers.

Some, yes.   I can accept that a race of beings that have been harvesting the galaxy for millions of years have Sufficiently Advanced technology that may operate on scientific laws humanity may not even have a concept of, let alone a name for.

I can accept that much of the far-future technology in the game comes from reverse-engineering artifacts of earlier civilizations, which are themselves guided along particular paths of development by Reapers.  Science or magic, the power comes from somewhere.  

So where does ressurection fit in?  Is this human technology, or alien technology?  Prothean?  Reaper?  Geth?  Something else?    Technology comes from somewhere.  Someone invents it.  In the Mass Effect universe, most of it came from Prothean relics.  But the Lazarus Project is curiously silent about its origins.  

In science fiction, anything is possible.  But anything and everything are two very different things

[Phaelducan]

iakus wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Which is why to enjoy science fiction, one generally has to give writers some benefit of the doubt. Without concrete evidence showing us that Shep can't be resurrected, I trust the writers.

Some, yes.   I can accept that a race of beings that have been harvesting the galaxy for millions of years have Sufficiently Advanced technology that may operate on scientific laws humanity may not even have a concept of, let alone a name for.

I can accept that much of the far-future technology in the game comes from reverse-engineering artifacts of earlier civilizations, which are themselves guided along particular paths of development by Reapers.  Science or magic, the power comes from somewhere.  

So where does ressurection fit in?  Is this human technology, or alien technology?  Prothean?  Reaper?  Geth?  Something else?    Technology comes from somewhere.  Someone invents it.  In the Mass Effect universe, most of it came from Prothean relics.  But the Lazarus Project is curiously silent about its origins.  

In science fiction, anything is possible.  But anything and everything are two very different things

It's just an odd stumbling block given how much else can easily be accepted. It really isn't even that far-fetched an idea, particularly since we have no concrete evidence about Shep's state at recovery nor about the process itself. It could be any number of things, and since it isn't greatly explored, it just seems weird that Lazarus is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

[Thompson family]

didymos1120 wrote...


Of course, TIM was a bit off there: the origin of mammals dates back to around 200 million years ago. Not that that matters as far as the derelict's age goes.

You are correct. What he should have said was when "the first recognizable forms of mammals we know today fully formed," but that's not exactly a good dramatic line.

[Arkitekt]

Let's all demand Bioware to give us a full list of every goddamned technology and their provenience in the 21st century, and let's demand they be actually very rigorous about it! Let's also demand they actually provide the science and revolutionize our world with mass effect techs.

We the fans demand this!

[Thompson family]

Arkitekt wrote...

Let's all demand Bioware to give us a full list of every goddamned technology and their provenience in the 21st century, and let's demand they be actually very rigorous about it! Let's also demand they actually provide the science and revolutionize our world with mass effect techs.

We the fans demand this!

22nd Century, to be precise.

[Iakus]

Phaelducan wrote...

It's just an odd stumbling block given how much else can easily be accepted. It really isn't even that far-fetched an idea, particularly since we have no concrete evidence about Shep's state at recovery nor about the process itself. It could be any number of things, and since it isn't greatly explored, it just seems weird that Lazarus is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

It can be accepted because it fits into the universe that was created.  It doesn't have to be possible in our universe, it just has to be consistant with what has been introduced in the created universe.  I can accept biotics not because I believe there's any scientific fact behind it.  I can accept it because it's an established piece of Mass Effect lore.  Complete with its own history and codex entries with faux scientific explanations for how it works.  It has something I can suspend my disbelief on.

The Lazarus Project has nothing like this.  It's that lack of evidence or information about the process that's precisely the problem.  There is no backstory, there is no scientific explanations given, real or otherwise.  It bears no resemblence to any other Mass Effect technology I've seen humans using.  It has no context.  So I have no option but to use the context I do have:  early 21st century medicine. 

I can look at a flying car and think "mass effect field"  What am I supposed to think when I see a dead man walking?

[Sgt Stryker]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

TIM: "This is a relic from a battle that was waged when mammals took their first steps upon the Earth."

Of course, TIM was a bit off there: the origin of mammals dates back to around 200 million years ago. Not that that matters as far as the derelict's age goes.

I wince every time TIM says that... 

Meh, he was only off by one order of magnitude.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Phaelducan wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

No, we don't know that. The human brain has never been recovered and recreated to the extent we are referencing. It is entirely possible that if the brain had any intact anything left, given the short amount of time, Lazerus could have completely restored Shep to the state they were in before the attack.

You "know" nothing in this case, it's all conjecture and theoretical, and you are applying 20th/early 21th century medicine and science as your basis.

I would offer the friendly suggestion of some reading on the neuranatomy of memory.  We know enough right now to know that memory isn't in DNA, and you can't restore someone's memory with cloned neurons. 

Memory is information.  That information is not stored in the DNA.  That information is stored across billions of neurons and in minute structural details of the brain.  When the brain is lost, so is the information. 

The idea of cloning someone and getting their memories back in the clone is kinda cool, but based on what we know right now, it's less possible than FTL. 


The argument that Shep's brain isn't as damaged as statements by Wilson, Miranda, et al, make it sound, is a much more productive argument for those who want to defend the story as is --  at least that provides a path to plausibility.  Cloned neurons do not. 

I already said he wasn't cloned. You are talking about cloning the brain, I'm not. I'm saying that if the brain isn't completely destroyed, it could be restored. The tissue could be partially cloned, but you wouldn't have to start from scratch, as the memories would still be intact. Yeah, we can't do it now, but ME2 isn't now.

I get that, but you're drawing a very thin line there... once you reach the point of needing to replace lost neurons with cloned neurons, you've probably lost some of the information as well.  You used a phrasing at one point from which I inferred a state of damage that required a lot of cloned neurons, but maybe I misunderstood. 

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arkitekt wrote...

Ah, troll Soroner still thinks people are here defending ME2. Wake up, we are here trashing Smudboy's pretensious bull**** along with all his minion fanboys, from which you are the most juvenile member.

Don't me me juvenile boy.
It's clear as day I'm older than you both physical and especially mentally.

And unless you missed the last 200 pages of this thread, regardless of how muhc you love/hate Smudboy, some of his criticism has merrit - otherwise, we wouldn't have argued it for so long.

So yes..You are defending ME2 by trashing Smudboy and everyone else who agrees with him.

[Iakus]

Thompson family wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...


Of course, TIM was a bit off there: the origin of mammals dates back to around 200 million years ago. Not that that matters as far as the derelict's age goes.

You are correct. What he should have said was when "the first recognizable forms of mammals we know today fully formed," but that's not exactly a good dramatic line.

He might have more of a leg to stand on if he said "first apes" but even that's pushing it.

[Phaelducan]

iakus wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

It's just an odd stumbling block given how much else can easily be accepted. It really isn't even that far-fetched an idea, particularly since we have no concrete evidence about Shep's state at recovery nor about the process itself. It could be any number of things, and since it isn't greatly explored, it just seems weird that Lazarus is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

It can be accepted because it fits into the universe that was created.  It doesn't have to be possible in our universe, it just has to be consistant with what has been introduced in the created universe.  I can accept biotics not because I believe there's any scientific fact behind it.  I can accept it because it's an established piece of Mass Effect lore.  Complete with its own history and codex entries with faux scientific explanations for how it works.  It has something I can suspend my disbelief on.

The Lazarus Project has nothing like this.  It's that lack of evidence or information about the process that's precisely the problem.  There is no backstory, there is no scientific explanations given, real or otherwise.  It bears no resemblence to any other Mass Effect technology I've seen humans using.  It has no context.  So I have no option but to use the context I do have:  early 21st century medicine. 

I can look at a flying car and think "mass effect field"  What am I supposed to think when I see a dead man walking?

I disagree with your assessment of the Lazarus Project. It's explained fairly thoroughly, at least what the project is. It doesn't get into how it works in great detail, but it's not a full-on "wtf is this thing" moment.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arkitekt wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

:O:O:lol:

Reding comprehension...Learn it.

Then go back and re-read my post. Then maybe you will grasp it's meaning.

This is becoming really pathetic. Now you even show that you can't even read what you yourself write, you're dragging BSN's level to a state of unheard stupidity.

As I general rule I don't quote myself, but I'll make an exception here:

I'm no hater. But obviously I have to be..cause anyone who doesn't
worship ME2 on the altar of perfection and doesn't like every single
tiny piece of it, MUST be a dirty, foul hater, right?

Next time you try to quote a guy, make sure you understand what he's saying in the first place. You'll spare yourself the embarassment of looking like a moron.

[100k]

Arkitekt wrote...
100k, I called you out on your shenanigans, not for the obvious fact that ME2 is far from a perfect game. But very well, let's get the party going in another direction.

What about the ridiculous smudargument that the team mates don't need to solve their own "daddy issues" because they are "professionals", before going into what might well be their final mission?

Just the naming "daddy issues" is already a mass failure...

We can rename them as "family issues", and occasionally "personal issues" then. Because that's essentially what they are.

But, Smud is correct, I think, when he claims that none of those things should matter during a suicide mission. Miranda is a professional. Jacob is a proffessional. Kasumi is a proffessional. To make their lives hinge upon personal conflicts doesn't make any sense to me. Thane's been killing for 30 some years, right? And now he'll die because he's distracted by what his son -- 50 light years away -- might be doing?

I know, I know, even the most professional people have human elements to them. I accept that. But, with the exception of Grunt (who is a survivor/professional) there is little to no rationale for why these in game SM deaths occur. 

Smudboy proposes making the LMs into ME2's remaining story -- and erasing half the cast because they are (to him) either comical, or redundant. 

I disagree with him for two reasons:

1) TIM doesn't know how Thane's abilities will come into play in the months that make up ME2. He doesn't know how Archangels talents will come into play. Neither does Shepard. Neither does Miranda. All he knows is that there might be situations where the assassin's abilities might be needed. 

As such, in my opinion, it would've been far to...convinient for situations where an assassin would be uniquely needed to occur. Shepard just happens to recruit Thane, and Krios's abilites just happen to be needed at this particular point of the plot? I just don't buy that.

2) Smudboy's views on removing a comical or redundant character undermine his rewrite of a plot that consists of several SMs occuring before the stories climax. What if Garrus died at a certain point in the story? Then he can't fulfill his role later on, right? 

By instead having the large cast that we do have, multiple deaths could always be powerful, without damning the player to completely fvck up later in the story. Garrus's death could be powerful, but also acceptable, considering that Legion and Zaeed seem to have similar abilities. 

I proposed keeping the LMs in the game as is, and adding something akin to an X Men Danger Room challenge that shows that, through cooperation and team work, the team could survive the SMs. 

Now, I know what the counter arguments are:

They're already extraordinary individuals, so why should they need to train?

Because they are all so skilled that their abilities to function in a squad could be extremely hindered. Can you imagine the speed and agility of Kasumi distracting the military ravaged Garrus? Both are exceptional combatants, but their skill is so great that it could be damaging.

They're professionals, so they would already function well.

This is only true for Miranda, Kasumi, Jacob, Garrus, Mordin, Tali, and Thane. 

Samara, Legion, Zaeed (yes, Zaeed), Jack, and Grunt, are all survivors. Experience and lone-riding made these characters into the people they are, not unit cohesion. Even Zaeed is more survivor than professional. Jack and Grunt probably wouldn't follow anyone but Shepard. Legion is a (sapient) machine with a reputation of destroying colonies, and sparking organic-synthetic conflict. He's not going to be respected as much as the others. Samara follows a code, and is sworn to Shepard.

On top of that, look at that top list of proffessionals -- Thane is highly anti social (self admitted). Miranda may govern the respect of humans, but the aliens don't like her -- and she herself doubts her ability to lead at one point. Kasumi is not only a loner, but she's also more of a thief than combatant.

So, on that list, the only people I can see as fully well rounded are Garrus (who was recruited by accident), Jacob, and Tali (also semi recruited by accident).

You can sort of see how not only putting together the best football players on the same team solves the problem of having a potentially bad team. Training is also important. As such, some kind of training program could allow your squad of, for lack of a better word, "misfits", grow as a unit, and if you're paragon, as a family. We could see character growth outside of the Shepard + squadmate exclusive interaction. We could see how egos sort of melted away in favor of friendship -- or at least professional respect. 

Naturally, some characters just wouldn't get along. Thane and Jacob, Jack and Miranda, etc. But having the best team's fates defined by how they function together as a unit makes 100x more sense than their personal problems -- which are grossly equlipsed by the threat of a Reaper invasion.

[Iakus]

Phaelducan wrote...

I disagree with your assessment of the Lazarus Project. It's explained fairly thoroughly, at least what the project is. It doesn't get into how it works in great detail, but it's not a full-on "wtf is this thing" moment.

I think I missed that part in the game.  All I got out of the explanations was a high number of credits and a vague "biosynthetic fusion" term.  

[Phaelducan]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

No, we don't know that. The human brain has never been recovered and recreated to the extent we are referencing. It is entirely possible that if the brain had any intact anything left, given the short amount of time, Lazerus could have completely restored Shep to the state they were in before the attack.

You "know" nothing in this case, it's all conjecture and theoretical, and you are applying 20th/early 21th century medicine and science as your basis.

I would offer the friendly suggestion of some reading on the neuranatomy of memory.  We know enough right now to know that memory isn't in DNA, and you can't restore someone's memory with cloned neurons. 

Memory is information.  That information is not stored in the DNA.  That information is stored across billions of neurons and in minute structural details of the brain.  When the brain is lost, so is the information. 

The idea of cloning someone and getting their memories back in the clone is kinda cool, but based on what we know right now, it's less possible than FTL. 


The argument that Shep's brain isn't as damaged as statements by Wilson, Miranda, et al, make it sound, is a much more productive argument for those who want to defend the story as is --  at least that provides a path to plausibility.  Cloned neurons do not. 

I already said he wasn't cloned. You are talking about cloning the brain, I'm not. I'm saying that if the brain isn't completely destroyed, it could be restored. The tissue could be partially cloned, but you wouldn't have to start from scratch, as the memories would still be intact. Yeah, we can't do it now, but ME2 isn't now.

I get that, but you're drawing a very thin line there... once you reach the point of needing to replace lost neurons with cloned neurons, you've probably lost some of the information as well.  You used a phrasing at one point from which I inferred a state of damage that required a lot of cloned neurons, but maybe I misunderstood. 

I just want to emphasize you saying "probably" lost some information. He probably did lose some, but that wouldn't negate the success of the project as a whole. Even if he is only 90% aware of his previous experiences, that's still more than a lot of other functional adults with memory/experience loss due to trauma, drug addiction, etc.

[Arkitekt]

@Lotion Sophomoric

We are arguing one point of his for the past 80 pages, and I bet it is because all of his other points are way less controversial (and false / or petty). For a review that has more than one hour lenght, I think it's pretty pathetic.

And it's also curious that once you got out of this thread, the level of the conversation actually increased one order of magnitude or more. A pity that you decided to come back.

Modifié par Arkitekt, 20 septembre 2011 - 08:49 .