6494 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

The lore state it can....from ME1. http://masseffect.wi...ss_Effect_Field

"In space, low-mass fields allow FTL travel and inexpensive surface-to-orbit transit. High-mass fields create artificial gravity and push space debris away from starships. In manufacturing, low-mass fields permit the creation of evenly-blended alloys, while high mass compaction creates dense, sturdy construction materials."

...........

Are we now going to call the lore from ME1 a retcon, too.

[dreman9999]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

And you ask for proof that it can be done.  The fact you did not know this shows you don't know the lore.

Oh, I thought him calling everything he doesn't like or agree with a plot hole or retcon showed he didn't know the lore.

And he ran ...agein. Can't even stay to finish his arguement.

Modifié par dreman9999, 01 septembre 2011 - 06:20 .

[Someone With Mass]

dreman9999 wrote...

Are we now going to call the lore from ME1 a retcon, too.

Yep. 

[dreman9999]

Someone With Mass wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Are we now going to call the lore from ME1 a retcon, too.

Yep. 

Fixer0 already did.

[dreman9999]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

I think it's best if we all say that Mass Effect has bad writing and inconsistencies.

No, it's best to say that anyone that say so just don't understand the ploat or the lore or even read the lore and understood it. Though ME2 have some peises of bad writing like in ME1, it still has way more good than bad.

[Killjoy Cutter]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

I think it's best if we all say that Mass Effect has bad writing and inconsistencies.

It's best if people restrict their specific criticism to real issues with the story and setting...

rather than form criticisms from half the facts and misunderstandings, and then cling to those criticisms bitterly no matter what. 

[dreman9999]

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

I think it's best if we all say that Mass Effect has bad writing and inconsistencies.

No, it's best to say that anyone that say so just don't understand the ploat or the lore or even read the lore and understood it. Though ME2 have some peises of bad writing like in ME1, it still has way more good than bad.

ME2 was really just a mixture of short stories, retcons (yes I said retcons) and screw ups, while ME1 was just a snoresfest, if you as me.

They were no retcons in ME2. Everything the have in the game is explained in ME1 and ME2.  The short stories were part of the overall theme of getting ready for an assult mission  which doing those missions get you ready for the last mission. The only screw up was the fact they rushed the start of the final mission and the last boss fight. The only plothole is on jacobs loyalty mission about ammo. And if you want to call things retcons, learn the meaning of the word..
As for ME1 being a snorefest, they just your opinion.

[Guldhun2]

dreman9999 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

I think it's best if we all say that Mass Effect has bad writing and inconsistencies.

No, it's best to say that anyone that say so just don't understand the ploat or the lore or even read the lore and understood it. Though ME2 have some peises of bad writing like in ME1, it still has way more good than bad.

ME2 was really just a mixture of short stories, retcons (yes I said retcons) and screw ups, while ME1 was just a snoresfest, if you as me.

They were no retcons in ME2. Everything the have in the game is explained in ME1 and ME2.  The short stories were part of the overall theme of getting ready for an assult mission  which doing those missions get you ready for the last mission. The only screw up was the fact they rushed the start of the final mission and the last boss fight. The only plothole is on jacobs loyalty mission about ammo. And if you want to call things retcons, learn the meaning of the word..
As for ME1 being a snorefest, they just your opinion.

You don't know what a retcon is. Please stop posting **** until you understand what a retcon is.

[dreman9999]

Guldhun2 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Big Bad Wolf wrote...

I think it's best if we all say that Mass Effect has bad writing and inconsistencies.

No, it's best to say that anyone that say so just don't understand the ploat or the lore or even read the lore and understood it. Though ME2 have some peises of bad writing like in ME1, it still has way more good than bad.

ME2 was really just a mixture of short stories, retcons (yes I said retcons) and screw ups, while ME1 was just a snoresfest, if you as me.

They were no retcons in ME2. Everything the have in the game is explained in ME1 and ME2.  The short stories were part of the overall theme of getting ready for an assult mission  which doing those missions get you ready for the last mission. The only screw up was the fact they rushed the start of the final mission and the last boss fight. The only plothole is on jacobs loyalty mission about ammo. And if you want to call things retcons, learn the meaning of the word..
As for ME1 being a snorefest, they just your opinion.

You don't know what a retcon is. Please stop posting **** until you understand what a retcon is.

Retroactive Continuity.
Reframing past events to serve a current plot need. When the inserted events work with what was previously stated, it's a Revision; when they outright replace it, it's a Rewrite. The ideal retcon clarifies a question alluded to without adding excessive new questions. In its most basic form, this is any plot point that was not intended from the beginning. The most preferred use is where it contradicts nothing, even though it was changed later on.


...Nothing like that is in ME2 because everything is explain using details from ME1.

[Killjoy Cutter]

I'd have to go back and play both games in sequence to form a strong opinion on whether anything qualifies as a retcon in ME2.

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I'd have to go back and play both games in sequence to form a strong opinion on whether anything qualifies as a retcon in ME2.

I've checked. Nothing is. You have to look at ME1 story and lore see this.

[Therefore_I_Am]

Smudboy sounds like a guy who was dumped by his girlfriend and then, at the end of the day, takes his sorry ass aggression out on a video game. The guy has some life issues if he's going to nitpick like he did.

[Killjoy Cutter]

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 01 septembre 2011 - 07:14 .

[bduff4545]

Added new links and title :-).

[111987]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

Mmm okay. I don't know enough about radiation, particle or otherwise, to discuss the topic

[SpiffySquee]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

True, but this could have used more explanation as most people don't instantly think particle radiation. Most people, on the other hand, would look at different examples Kinetic barriers where some stop slow moving objects and some don't and connect the dots that Kinetic barriers can be adjusted. It is a logical conclusion that the game should not have to spell out. Only a very few people think that the game must state everything precisely or it is non-existent.

It is exactly the same as saying, "I see a female restroom. EDI even states that this is the female restroom, but no matter how many times I bust in there, I never see any females using it. Therefore... Females in the mass effect universe must not use restrooms. If they did, Bioware must show us they did."

Or, even better, "Kal had a purple tinted mask on Haestrom, but when I saw him in the fleet he had a black tinted mask. He could not have changed it, or received a new suit when his old one was punctured because Bioware never told us it happened. Conclusion? It was a retcon and bad writing!!!"

Every game, Every single one forces people to connect some dots because you cannot fit an entire galaxy of information onto one or two disks. The game cannot tell you everything about everything and in order for you to beleive this is a living breathing world, you must draw certain conclusions on your own.

[Killjoy Cutter]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

True, but this could have used more explanation as most people don't instantly think particle radiation. Most people, on the other hand, would look at different examples Kinetic barriers where some stop slow moving objects and some don't and connect the dots that Kinetic barriers can be adjusted. It is a logical conclusion that the game should not have to spell out. Only a very few people think that the game must state everything precisely or it is non-existent.

It is exactly the same as saying, "I see a female restroom. EDI even states that this is the female restroom, but no matter how many times I bust in there, I never see any females using it. Therefore... Females in the mass effect universe must not use restrooms. If they did, Bioware must show us they did."

Or, even better, "Kal had a purple tinted mask on Haestrom, but when I saw him in the fleet he had a black tinted mask. He could not have changed it, or received a new suit when his old one was punctured because Bioware never told us it happened. Conclusion? It was a retcon and bad writing!!!"

Every game, Every single one forces people to connect some dots because you cannot fit an entire galaxy of information onto one or two disks. The game cannot tell you everything about everything and in order for you to beleive this is a living breathing world, you must draw certain conclusions on your own.

Agreed completely.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

The thing is the sun on Haestrom was frying all tech it had direct sun light on reguardless of protection. The shield going down was not indecating interactiontion shield. It was indecation of the interaction to the tech in general. The generator of the shield were just stop working, not the shield were  getting warn down.

[Killjoy Cutter]

111987 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

Mmm okay. I don't know enough about radiation, particle or otherwise, to discuss the topic

Well, it's established that kinetic barriers can stop small, high-velocity objects, right? 

Particle radiation is literally very very small objects moving at very, very high velocity. 

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Alpha_decay
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Beta_decay
http://en.wikipedia....utron_radiation
http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Cosmic_ray

In theory, a kinetic barrier could interact with these particiles, providing protection.  This also explains how a barrier could possibly provide some degree of defense against the collector particle beam weapons. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

The thing is the sun on Haestrom was frying all tech it had direct sun light on reguardless of protection. The shield going down was not indecating interactiontion shield. It was indecation of the interaction to the tech in general. The generator of the shield were just stop working, not the shield were  getting warn down.

The shields go down over time in the same manner as if being struck by enemy fire. 

Other equipment does not appear to shut down immediately, and indeed seems to function normally, including the weapons, which also use mass effect fields and complicated computerized systems.  The shuttle is able to fly in and land, without its barrier and mass effect generator(s) failing.  One possible explanation is that its barrier is strong enough to resist the particle radiation, while personal units are not. 

Another hint that barriers are able to resist particle radiation is the fact that ships are able to travel long times and distances in space without several meters of physical shielding against cosmic "rays".

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 01 septembre 2011 - 07:51 .

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Stop trying to prove that a ship can deflect space debris we're past that already. The point is, it isn't consistent. As I've said earlier, Mass Effect Shields are just plot devices: they are what the plot needs them to be at any moment and nothing more, which is my problem.

So...what I'm gathering from this is that, despite being supported by both in-game examples and the lore (i.e. Codex), the shields are acting inconsistently?

At least use an example where the shielding isn't acting consistently, like on Haestrom. The shields drained there, when they shouldn't have. This is obviously a game play mechanic, but the point still stands

See, I can point out and admit to where ME2 has inconsistencies. You seem unable to accept that you, in this instance, are just plain wrong.

I'm not even sure that Haestrom counts... if the radiation is particle radiation, then it could interact with the kinetic barriers and cause them to "drain". 

The thing is the sun on Haestrom was frying all tech it had direct sun light on reguardless of protection. The shield going down was not indecating interactiontion shield. It was indecation of the interaction to the tech in general. The generator of the shield were just stop working, not the shield were  getting warn down.

The shields go down over time in the same manner as if being struck by enemy fire. 

And that's because the shield genorator is being fried by the sun.

[Sgt Stryker]

Fixers0 wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Do you see Shepard getting blinded or fried by that star? No. Therefore the logical conclusion is that the star does not output radiation of high enough intensity to be harmful. Of course, that would be the in-universe explanation. The out-of-universe explanation can be "lolplotholeretcon", if you choose to go that way, that is.

Sure just keep inventing things up from which you have no evidence of.

But do me a favor a watch this video from about 12:00.

www.youtube.com/watch

Smudboy once again stating his opinion as an immutable fact. Nothing new there. Now where did I put my turian air quotes....