6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

ME fields and kinetic barriers are explained in realtion to real-life sceince.

As a means of making ME-tech seem more plausible, that doesn't the games always adhere to it.

When you explain something, then you have to be consistent with it workings. It's as simple as that.

This is Mass Effect we're talking about, pretty much everything is possible nowadays; resurrections, omni-blades...

Applying of science here is perfectly consistent with all database entires and explanatiosn of how things work, and everything obserbved.

Your explnation is contrary to the in-game explanations, as the workings of kinetic barreirs don't say what you just said. You are free to try to invent unsopported theories to explain plot holes and jsutify bad writing to yourself, but teh bad writing remains regardless.

The Codex wrote...

Kinetic barriers, colloquially called "shields", provide protection against most mass accelerator weapons. Whether on a starship or a soldier's suit of armor, the basic principle remains the same.Kinetic barriers are repulsive mass effect fields projected from tiny emitters. These shields safely deflect small objects traveling at rapid velocities. This affords protection from bullets and other dangerous projectiles, but still allows the user to sit down without knocking away their chair.The shielding afforded by kinetic barriers does not protect against extremes of temperature, toxins, or radiation.

Note how it doesn't say anything about momentum, only velocity.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 01 septembre 2011 - 01:41 .

[Guldhun2]

Il Divo wrote...

Aren't cut-scenes where "rule of cool" moments are most applicable? Similar to how Saren is able to one-shot Nihlus which works better from a visual effect, than having to shoot him five times? 

Ok then, let's take a watch at the description of those upgraded shields.

Multicore shielding utilizing Cyclonic Barrier Technology (CBT) can be refitted to the Normandy SR-2 (Upgrade, Cost: 15,000 Palladium). The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force. By rotationally firing their mass effect field projectors, the ship creates rapidly oscillating kinetic barriers instead of static ones. Shooting through the CBT is like trying to shoot at a target inside a spinning ball. If an emitter is damaged, the CBT corrects to become a traditional shield array, a safety feature that makes it most effective during opening volleys.


Do you noticed the most important word in that description? The one word which proofs dreman9999 wrong.
You don't see it?

Ok i'll help---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

You notice the word? Still don't see that important word?

Ok then, i'll bold it ---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

That means rather that standard kinetic barriers. Which don't stop any direct impact from slow moving objects like the massive chunks of debris. So the CBT only "slaps aside" small objects traveling at rapid velocities.




THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.

Modifié par Guldhun2, 01 septembre 2011 - 01:42 .

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

ME fields and kinetic barriers are explained in realtion to real-life sceince. When you explain something, then you have to be consistent with it workings. It's as simple as that.

Except for the little fact that it's physically impossible to change a object's mass without changing its form or molecular properties. The whole thing with mass effect fields is really just an excuse for...anything that's scientifically questionable.

The debris in the field is hardly slow moving in relation to the Normandy's speed, either.

[Balek-Vriege]

111987 wrote...

Okay, this debate is CLEARLY going nowhere...this is the point where rational, mature people agree to disagree, and leave it at that...

We're talking about kinetic barriers because we were debating whether or not a probe should be sent through the Omega 4 Relay. Some people believe the absence of this probe=plot hole, bad writing, etc...other people, such as myself disagree, arguing that recon via probes would not yield useful data.

Two sides that will likely never come to an agreement. Let's leave it at that, shall we?

That's true really.  Woke up this morning to breeze over the last 1-15 pages and saw the arguement go in the extreme direction from "Well, this is a plot hole because it was explained or brought up in the story" to "This is a plot hole, bad writing and anything else under the sun regardless of what the game explains and regardless of whatever others think.  I'm right and you are of course wrong because...  i'm always right"


This Kinetic Barrier/Debris thing has been explained.  Lets put it into simple terms shall we:

1.  Kinetic Barriers are meant to stop things travelling at high velocities.
2.  We know Debris in space around Earth travels at bullet like velocities even if they look like they're traveling at super slow speeds. (International Space Station is threatened by it all the time  How fast could debris be flying around Black holes etc?) 
3.  EDI mentions that Kinetic Barriers were not designed to stop debris of that SIZE
4.  The upgraded Kinetic Barriers (explained in CODEX) work differently than normal ones, basically being smart shields by sureing up where something is going to hit rather than protecting the whole ship
5.  After EDI warns Joker he says good thing we updated.
6.  Debris hits the upgraded shields and they protect the ship

That issue is 100% explained.  That is not a plot hole or bad writing (in the parameters we have set up). You may wish it to be or be of the opinion that shields shouldn't work like that.  However, it doesn't contradict anything previously stated in ME lore and actually builds upon it.  It's one thing to say "Well I think they use Kinetic Barriers as get out of jail free cards in ME2." You could say the same about shields/barriers in all combat in ME, but a fair opinion.

What you can't do or shouldn't do is say "You are 100% wrong because the facts are wrong (with no backup info proving the facts wrong) and i'm right because I think it to be the case."  That's not a reasoned or valid argument.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 01 septembre 2011 - 01:44 .

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Yeah, use those "cool" words!

I'm trying.

Someone With Mass wrote...
Seriously, the solution for that is quite simple. Don't take the ship near a radiated area and/or seal of the breach.

That logic would probably never come into Shepard's mind.

Someone With Mass wrote...
It does not make it a retcon, since the game never directly told anyone that they're blocking radiation.

Yes they did.

Someone With Mass wrote...
No, that's just you spewing out the few words you can use to describe anything you don't like.

I don't like bad writing or retcons, Problems?

[Guldhun2]

Balek-Vriege wrote...
That's true really.  Woke up this morning to breeze over the last 1-15 pages and saw the arguement go in the extreme direction from "Well, this is a plot hole because it was explained or brought up in the story" to "This is a plot hole, bad writing and anything else under the sun regardless of what the game explains and regardless of whatever others think.  I'm right and you are of course wrong because...  i'm always right"


This Kinetic Barrier/Debris thing has been explained.  Lets put it into simple terms shall we:

1.  Kinetic Barriers are meant to stop things travelling at high velocities.
2.  We know Debris in space around Earth travels at bullet like velocities even if they look like they're traveling at super slow speeds. (International Space Station is threatened by it all the time  How fast could debris be flying around Black holes etc?) 
3.  EDI mentions that Kinetic Barriers were not designed to stop debris of that SIZE
4.  The upgraded Kinetic Barriers (explained in CODEX) work differently than normal ones, basically being smart shields by sureing up where something is going to hit rather than protecting the whole ship
5.  After EDI warns Joker he says good thing we updated.
6.  Debris hits the upgraded shields and they protect the ship

That issue is 100% explained.  That is not a plot hole or bad writing (in the parameters we have set up). You may wish it to be or be of the opinion that shields shouldn't work like that.  However, it doesn't contradict anything previously stated in ME lore and actually builds upon it.  It's one thing to say "Well I think they use Kinetic Barriers as get out of jail free cards in ME2." You could say the same about shields/barriers in all combat in ME, but a fair opinion.

What you can't do or shouldn't do is say "You are 100% wrong because the facts are wrong (with no backup info proving the facts wrong) and i'm right because I think it to be the case."  That's not a reasoned or valid argument.

Look up to my post dear.

[Il Divo]

Guldhun2 wrote...

Ok then, let's take a watch at the description of those upgraded shields.

Multicore shielding utilizing Cyclonic Barrier Technology (CBT) can be refitted to the Normandy SR-2 (Upgrade, Cost: 15,000 Palladium). The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force. By rotationally firing their mass effect field projectors, the ship creates rapidly oscillating kinetic barriers instead of static ones. Shooting through the CBT is like trying to shoot at a target inside a spinning ball. If an emitter is damaged, the CBT corrects to become a traditional shield array, a safety feature that makes it most effective during opening volleys.


Do you noticed the most important word in that description? The one word which proofs dreman9999 wrong.
You don't see it?

Ok i'll help---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

You notice the word? Still don't see that important word?

Ok then, i'll bold it ---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

That means rather that standard kinetic barriers. Which don't stop any direct impact from slow moving objects like the massive chunks of debris. So the CBT only "slaps aside" small objects traveling at rapid velocities.

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.

Which has nothing to do with my point. I don't care what the codex says or what dreman says. My point was regarding how cut-scenes often ignore minor aspects of the universe, in exchange for visual effect. Your "argument" is wasted.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 septembre 2011 - 01:46 .

[Guldhun2]

Il Divo wrote...
Which has nothing to do with my point. I don't care what the codex says or what dreman says.

I had to quote someone....

[Someone With Mass]

Guldhun2 wrote...

Do you noticed the most important word in that description? The one word which proofs dreman9999 wrong.
You don't see it?

Ok i'll help---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

You notice the word? Still don't see that important word?

Ok then, i'll bold it ---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

That means rather that standard kinetic barriers. Which don't stop any direct impact from slow moving objects like the massive chunks of debris. So the CBT only "slaps aside" small objects traveling at rapid velocities.

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.

Do you know what one of the engineers in the engineer room also says?

That the shield is designed for hard and fast strikes. I'd call hitting spaceship debris at the speed of a few thousand kilometers per hour as hard and fast.

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
It does not make it a retcon, since the game never directly told anyone that they're blocking radiation.

Yes they did.

Really? When in the epilogue of the suicide mission did they say that the shields are blocking radiation?

[Notlikeyoucare]

Il Divo wrote...

Aren't cut-scenes where "rule of cool" moments are most applicable? Similar to how Saren is able to one-shot Nihlus which works better from a visual effect, than having to shoot him five times? 

The Nihlus case is the same. This could be considered a continuity error or Saren's gun was just that strong ( which is supported by extremely strong in-game weapons) . The thing is, it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the plot in any way, Saren would have killed Nihlus regardless.

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
It does not make it a retcon, since the game never directly told anyone that they're blocking radiation.

Yes they did.

Really? When in the epilogue of the suicide mission did they say that the shields are blocking radiation?

Excuse me, A kintec barriers is incapable of doing anything behind protecting against objects moving at rapid velocities, Now Shepad stars into a star, which is very close comparing it to the other ones behind it, Would't that have fried him?

[Il Divo]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

The Nihlus case is the same. This could be considered a continuity error or Saren's gun was just that strong ( which is supported by extremely strong in-game weapons) .

Yet we do have gameplay-narrative segregation. How many pistols in Mass Effect are there which can one shot an enemy up close?

The thing is, it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the plot in any way, Saren would have killed Nihlus regardless.

I disagree. One-shotting Nihlus was the only reason why Shepard had no evidence to stop Saren. All Nihlus would need is to hold out long enough for Shepard to reach him, or explain to him the situation over the radio. Hell, they could even overpower Saren at that point.  

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Excuse me, A kintec barriers is incapable of doing anything behind protecting against objects moving at rapid velocities, Now Shepad stars into a star, which is very close comparing it to the other ones behind it, Would't that have fried him?

Why is it that everyone thinks that mass effect fields have only one mode and can block only one kind of objects?

You know what the sun can also do? Blind him. It's his own damn fault if he stares directly into a sun, not the shield's.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 01 septembre 2011 - 01:58 .

[Balek-Vriege]

Guldhun2 wrote...

Balek-Vriege wrote...
That's true really.  Woke up this morning to breeze over the last 1-15 pages and saw the arguement go in the extreme direction from "Well, this is a plot hole because it was explained or brought up in the story" to "This is a plot hole, bad writing and anything else under the sun regardless of what the game explains and regardless of whatever others think.  I'm right and you are of course wrong because...  i'm always right"


This Kinetic Barrier/Debris thing has been explained.  Lets put it into simple terms shall we:

1.  Kinetic Barriers are meant to stop things travelling at high velocities.
2.  We know Debris in space around Earth travels at bullet like velocities even if they look like they're traveling at super slow speeds. (International Space Station is threatened by it all the time  How fast could debris be flying around Black holes etc?) 
3.  EDI mentions that Kinetic Barriers were not designed to stop debris of that SIZE
4.  The upgraded Kinetic Barriers (explained in CODEX) work differently than normal ones, basically being smart shields by sureing up where something is going to hit rather than protecting the whole ship
5.  After EDI warns Joker he says good thing we updated.
6.  Debris hits the upgraded shields and they protect the ship

That issue is 100% explained.  That is not a plot hole or bad writing (in the parameters we have set up). You may wish it to be or be of the opinion that shields shouldn't work like that.  However, it doesn't contradict anything previously stated in ME lore and actually builds upon it.  It's one thing to say "Well I think they use Kinetic Barriers as get out of jail free cards in ME2." You could say the same about shields/barriers in all combat in ME, but a fair opinion.

What you can't do or shouldn't do is say "You are 100% wrong because the facts are wrong (with no backup info proving the facts wrong) and i'm right because I think it to be the case."  That's not a reasoned or valid argument.

Look up to my post dear.

A fair and good point, I will change it to being 90% explained


Do we know what constitutes a small object or a big one though?  Do we know if they are completely useless vs. bigger objects.  Still goes with the following scene though.  EDI still said that the barriers are not designed for Debris that size regardless of the upgrades (essentially saying exactly what you just mentioned).  Joker says well good thing we upgraded.  Meaning he realises EDI is right, but their still in better shape than they were before without them.

Then we see the normandy evading most debris and then hit by a big piece of debris (well the normandy kind of slides along it) with sparks and damage being done.  It can be argued that the normal barriers+ CBT minimized the damge but still failed to hold back the Debris.  Especially since without CBT someone dies.

Edit:  To explain in simplier terms.  The CBT helps defend the Normandy by *trying* to slap away the large debris but failing.  By trying though it slows the debris down and minimizes damage and/or gives the Normandy enough time to fly past without truly bumping into eachother.

Ok that should get us the other 10%.  Maybe I should follow my advice from 10 pages back and actually read to the bottom before posting?

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 01 septembre 2011 - 02:01 .

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...
Why is it that everyone thinks that mass effect fields have only one mode and can block only one kind of objects?

Because the codex says that shielding doesn't protect against that, i don't think we were ever able to deduce that shields now can

Someone With Mass wrote...
You know what it can also do? Blind him. It's his own damn fault if he stares directly into a sun, not the shield's.

It's still end up being incorect use of shields in the story, contradicting the codex, thus creating a Retcon.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

The Nihlus case is the same. This could be considered a continuity error or Saren's gun was just that strong ( which is supported by extremely strong in-game weapons) .

Yet we do have gameplay-narrative segregation. How many pistols in Mass Effect are there which can one shot an enemy up close?

The thing is, it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the plot in any way, Saren would have killed Nihlus regardless.

I disagree. One-shotting Nihlus was the only reason why Shepard had no evidence to stop Saren. All Nihlus would need is to hold out long enough for Shepard to reach him, or explain to him the situation over the radio. Hell, they could even overpower Saren at that point.  

Funny thing is, if the audio team took out the sound of the gunshot, there'd be no point discussing this. I see it as both gameplay and story segregation and inconsistant as Jenkins took a few rounds before his barriers gave in, Ashley took a hit, Shepard can one shot people multiple times in cutscenes. Regardless its all supposition.

Lol, even in cutscene power to the max this universe isn't consistant.

I really think the Bioware teams need to communicate more effectively in order to keep the universe defined and not so random and arbitrary.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Guldhun2 wrote...

Do you noticed the most important word in that description? The one word which proofs dreman9999 wrong.
You don't see it?

Ok i'll help---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

You notice the word? Still don't see that important word?

Ok then, i'll bold it ---->The CBT violently slaps aside rather than halting incoming linear force

That means rather that standard kinetic barriers. Which don't stop any direct impact from slow moving objects like the massive chunks of debris. So the CBT only "slaps aside" small objects traveling at rapid velocities.

THANK YOU AND GOOD NIGHT.

Do you know what one of the engineers in the engineer room also says?

That the shield is designed for hard and fast strikes. I'd call hitting spaceship debris at the speed of a few thousand kilometers per hour as hard and fast.

Not that kind of hard and fast strike. 

"They're designed for hard, fast strikes, not sustained battles of attrition."  He's not refering to the manner in which something hits the shields, but the kind of operation the shields are designed for. 


As for the kinetic barriers, it's possible that they protect against particle radiation (neutrons, cosmic "rays" -- which aren't rays -- etc), but not electromagnetic radiation (x-rays, gamma). 

[Killjoy Cutter]

In general, the guns sometimes have the power to one-shot someone in cut scenes, and sometimes don't. It's jarring when a badass falls to single pistol shot through his KB....

[Il Divo]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

The Nihlus case is the same. This could be considered a continuity error or Saren's gun was just that strong ( which is supported by extremely strong in-game weapons) .

Yet we do have gameplay-narrative segregation. How many pistols in Mass Effect are there which can one shot an enemy up close?

The thing is, it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the plot in any way, Saren would have killed Nihlus regardless.

I disagree. One-shotting Nihlus was the only reason why Shepard had no evidence to stop Saren. All Nihlus would need is to hold out long enough for Shepard to reach him, or explain to him the situation over the radio. Hell, they could even overpower Saren at that point.  

Funny thing is, if the audio team took out the sound of the gunshot, there'd be no point discussing this. I see it as both gameplay and story segregation and inconsistant as Jenkins took a few rounds before his barriers gave in, Ashley took a hit, Shepard can one shot people multiple times in cutscenes. Regardless its all supposition.

Lol, even in cutscene power to the max this universe isn't consistant.

I really think the Bioware teams need to communicate more effectively in order to keep the universe defined and not so random and arbitrary.

True. If they get rid of the audio altogether, it would definitely remove alot of ambiguity. Essentially, it's "plot armor". Shields hold when the plot needs them to, and vice versa.

[Balek-Vriege]

Just to add to my previous post. I think your point Guldhun2 about the CBTs would be much stronger and a definite plot hole if they explained it the way it is in the CODEX and during that debris scene the following happened:

EDI: Our barriers are 100% ready

Joker: Yeah with our upgraded barriers this should be no problem!

*Debris three times bigger than the Normandy violently bounces off of the ship regardless of how CBTs are supposed to function*

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 01 septembre 2011 - 02:12 .

[Notlikeyoucare]

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

The Nihlus case is the same. This could be considered a continuity error or Saren's gun was just that strong ( which is supported by extremely strong in-game weapons) .

Yet we do have gameplay-narrative segregation. How many pistols in Mass Effect are there which can one shot an enemy up close?

The thing is, it doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the plot in any way, Saren would have killed Nihlus regardless.

I disagree. One-shotting Nihlus was the only reason why Shepard had no evidence to stop Saren. All Nihlus would need is to hold out long enough for Shepard to reach him, or explain to him the situation over the radio. Hell, they could even overpower Saren at that point.  

Funny thing is, if the audio team took out the sound of the gunshot, there'd be no point discussing this. I see it as both gameplay and story segregation and inconsistant as Jenkins took a few rounds before his barriers gave in, Ashley took a hit, Shepard can one shot people multiple times in cutscenes. Regardless its all supposition.

Lol, even in cutscene power to the max this universe isn't consistant.

I really think the Bioware teams need to communicate more effectively in order to keep the universe defined and not so random and arbitrary.

True. If they get rid of the audio altogether, it would definitely remove alot of ambiguity. Essentially, it's "plot armor". Shields hold when the plot needs them to, and vice versa.

Hence the term I created for describing them PTS= Plot Triggered Shield. Some people didn't like it though [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/unsure.png[/smilie]

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...
It's still end up being incorect use of shields in the story, contradicting the codex, thus creating a Retcon.

You're right. They should just let the vacuum suck out all the air, just because one spot of the CIC isn't protected against radiation.

It's not a contradiction of the Codex just because they happen to use shields to not let the air slip out and there happens to be a sun shining its light at them. 

Besides, I thought you and Zulu had jumped on the idiot train a long time ago and believed that nothing in the Codex can be trusted.

But now that it's convenient for you, you're treating it as the Codex of Infinite Wisdom. What a coincidence.

[Someone With Mass]

I guess by some people's logic, all cutscenes that takes place in space are "retcons", since there's no sound because there's no air in space.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Besides, I thought you and Zulu had jumped on the idiot train a long time ago and believed that nothing in the Codex can be trusted.

But now that it's convenient for you, you're treating it as the Codex of Infinite Wisdom. What a coincidence.

There's no reason to distrust the Codex when it comes to science,  just don't accept everything as fact when it concerns the less objective entries, or ones they don't have full knowledge about.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 01 septembre 2011 - 02:26 .