Aller au contenu

Photo

Smudboy's Mass Effect series analysis.


6494 réponses à ce sujet

#1801
KotorEffect3

KotorEffect3
  • Members
  • 9 416 messages

SpiffySquee wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

wtf 72 pages seriously?


72? oh good, I was wondering. I'm so glad you pop in every once in a while and announce the page number. It is such a vital service and you do it brilliantly. <_<

Says the one who helped Smud get even bigger through his response videos.


I'm sorry? I was making a sarcastic remark about how pointless it is to pop into a thread to simply point out the page number. How does that have anything to do with what you just said?



Smudboy doesn't need the ego boost and your sarcasm wasn't necessary, but apparently you love to keep feeding Smudboy

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 01 septembre 2011 - 08:46 .


#1802
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages
Anyway, "essnece of a species" IMO badly implemented, confusing, leaves us to wonder what the frak just happened. At least in ME1 we know we're not supposed to get what the Reapers' motives are. Now it seems like we're supposed to, but something ended up on the cutting room floor. Like Harbringer's interest in Shepard.

#1803
Tyrannosaurus Rex

Tyrannosaurus Rex
  • Members
  • 10 800 messages

SpiffySquee wrote...

alright then... to keep things on topic until more opposition comes, Anything on my videos to Smudsy that you disagree with, or wanted better explanation?


Why are you satisfied with ME2's intro?

#1804
111987

111987
  • Members
  • 3 758 messages

iakus wrote...

Anyway, "essnece of a species" IMO badly implemented, confusing, leaves us to wonder what the frak just happened. At least in ME1 we know we're not supposed to get what the Reapers' motives are. Now it seems like we're supposed to, but something ended up on the cutting room floor. Like Harbringer's interest in Shepard.


But maybe it was intentionally designed to be left an unanswered question? At least until ME3.

We still don't know the Reaper's motives. We know how they reproduce, but we do not know why the reproduce, or why they use organics to do this.

#1805
Killjoy Cutter

Killjoy Cutter
  • Members
  • 6 005 messages

dreman9999 wrote...

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. 

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".

You never realize that teck can be armor to protect agenst rediation over time. The ship landed in a shadow and quick got out before leaving. The guns are kept out of the sun because you are getting out of the sun.
Also, armor and metal is what protect things from radiation, like lead.

As I stated before. What your seeing with the shield is just the shield generator getting fried.


Your weapons are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed.  Your radios, suit computers, and so on, are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed. 

The only logical conclusion is that the shields are being affected in a way that the weapons, suit computers, radios, etc, are not.  That leaves us

As for the shuttle, it has to be exposed for the entire trip down, and the entire trip back up to the Normandy.  In fact, the Normandy itself is exposed if it's not in the shadow of Haestrom. 

A few millimeters of metal won't protect against what the magnetosphere and atmosphere won't protect against, by the way. 

#1806
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages

111987 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Anyway, "essnece of a species" IMO badly implemented, confusing, leaves us to wonder what the frak just happened. At least in ME1 we know we're not supposed to get what the Reapers' motives are. Now it seems like we're supposed to, but something ended up on the cutting room floor. Like Harbringer's interest in Shepard.


But maybe it was intentionally designed to be left an unanswered question? At least until ME3.

We still don't know the Reaper's motives. We know how they reproduce, but we do not know why the reproduce, or why they use organics to do this.


But consider, this stuff doesn't come from an arrogant Reaper boasting about how superior they are.  "Essence of a species" is a term used by EDI.  She's supposed to be on our side!  Essence of a species, human smoothie, "humans have it, Protheans didn't", even the fact that this is a form of Reaper reproduction, all comes from this AI that seems to have figured everything out, but can't explain what it's all about to begin with.

Actually, Harbringer boasting that "Those that you call Reapers are your salvation through destruction" is every bit as helpful as EDI's explanation.  And he's the one trying to kill you!

#1807
dreman9999

dreman9999
  • Members
  • 19 067 messages

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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. 

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".

You never realize that teck can be armor to protect agenst rediation over time. The ship landed in a shadow and quick got out before leaving. The guns are kept out of the sun because you are getting out of the sun.
Also, armor and metal is what protect things from radiation, like lead.

As I stated before. What your seeing with the shield is just the shield generator getting fried.


Your weapons are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed.  Your radios, suit computers, and so on, are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed. 

The only logical conclusion is that the shields are being affected in a way that the weapons, suit computers, radios, etc, are not.  That leaves us

As for the shuttle, it has to be exposed for the entire trip down, and the entire trip back up to the Normandy.  In fact, the Normandy itself is exposed if it's not in the shadow of Haestrom. 

A few millimeters of metal won't protect against what the magnetosphere and atmosphere won't protect against, by the way. 

That the thing.
Theirs a thing known as Electromagnetic shielding. http://en.wikipedia....netic_shielding

Electromagnetic shielding
is the process of reducing the electromagnetic field in a space by blocking the field with barriers made of conductive and/or magnetic materials. Shielding is typically applied (1) to enclosures to isolate electrical devices from the 'outside world' and (2) to cables to isolate wires from the environment through which the cable runs. Electromagnetic shielding that blocks radio frequency electromagnetic radiation is also known as RF shielding
.....


Thiers also Radiation protection...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding...



Radiation protection, sometimes known as radiological protection, is the science[citation needed] of protecting people and the environment from the harmful effects of ionizing radiation, which includes both particle radiation and high energy electromagnetic radiation.
Ionizing radiation is widely used in industry and medicine, but presents a significant health hazard. It causes microscopic damage to living tissue, resulting in skin burns and radiation sickness at high exposures and statistically elevated risks of cancer, tumors and genetic damage at low exposures.


Added on....Shielding design...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding#Shielding_design
Shielding reduces the intensity of radiation exponentially depending on the thickness.
This means when added thicknesses are used, the shielding multiplies. For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter is ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is 90 cm (3 ft) of dirt. This reduces gamma rays to 1/1,024 of their original intensity (1/2 multiplied by itself ten times). Halving thicknesses of some materials, that reduce gamma ray intensity by 50% (1/2) include[2]:


That how radiation is blocked in general. Layers of metal can stop and reduce levels of radiation. The shuttle can have heavy amount metel protection to give it time to get to the planet and back and it still landed in a shade to drop you.
Your guns arn't out long enough to get really damaged, like how your shield generator can recover when you are in the shade. The time it would take for your weapons tobe fully damage, ou would be long dead. Let alone every comment on the mission explains the sun is frying equipment.
Metal can reduce the amount of effect of radiation like lead and iron can stop radiation. The thing is on that mission, the radiation was so much that all of it could not be fully stopped, just reduced. In the end any equipment will get fried it it stay long enough in the sun.
What your see is the sheild generator  failing. Not the shield being degraded.

Modifié par dreman9999, 01 septembre 2011 - 09:28 .


#1808
Almostfaceman

Almostfaceman
  • Members
  • 5 463 messages

bduff4545 wrote...

100k wrote...

Come on, dude. We've talked about this multiple times! Some of us like what he said. Some of us disagree with him.

Lets just abandon this.


I never saw the threads...sorry if I missed them.


Lies, you just wanna keep the smudboy train rollin'. Sycophant. 

#1809
SpiffySquee

SpiffySquee
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Lizardviking wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

alright then... to keep things on topic until more opposition comes, Anything on my videos to Smudsy that you disagree with, or wanted better explanation?


Why are you satisfied with ME2's intro?


Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard. The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls. ;)

#1810
Sgt Stryker

Sgt Stryker
  • Members
  • 2 590 messages

SpiffySquee wrote...
Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.


I think that's why this time around, BW is keeping the story spoilers to a minimum in all the marketing we've seen so far. Damn commendable, I must say. I get the impression that a lot of people were unhappy that they dropped the "Shepard dies" spoiler a long time before release, and by the time they actually got to play the game, it did not have the impact it needed.

#1811
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

>snip<

Now onto Smudboy's videos

How about that "essence of a species" thing?  ME2 definitely could have gone a little more into that, if for no other reason than to give us an idea as to what the Reapers are really after.  All we got out of that was "They wanna make babies with us!"


As always Iakus, your efforts at keeping threads on topic are always well-appreciated.  

#1812
SpiffySquee

SpiffySquee
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Sgt Stryker wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.


I think that's why this time around, BW is keeping the story spoilers to a minimum in all the marketing we've seen so far. Damn commendable, I must say. I get the impression that a lot of people were unhappy that they dropped the "Shepard dies" spoiler a long time before release, and by the time they actually got to play the game, it did not have the impact it needed.


Agreed big ball drop there. I think I might have looked at the opening in a very different light had I known of Shep's death before hand. :?

#1813
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

alright then... to keep things on topic until more opposition comes, Anything on my videos to Smudsy that you disagree with, or wanted better explanation?


Why are you satisfied with ME2's intro?


Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard. The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls. ;)


This pretty much explains my thoughts on the resurrection. I fully understand what some critics mean when they say it was badly implemented, Bioware should have placed Shepard in a coma, etc. The Lazarus Project simply happens, and is never mentioned again. There are mistakes made.

But Squee pretty much hits why I'm still able to forgive the Lazarus Project, despite its flaws. There's something about watching the Normandy's destruction and Shepard hurtling into oblivion which does a terrific job of setting the mood. Especially for any player who didn't have ME2's intro spoiled, it's a dramatic change in tone.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 septembre 2011 - 09:40 .


#1814
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

111987 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Anyway, "essnece of a species" IMO badly implemented, confusing, leaves us to wonder what the frak just happened. At least in ME1 we know we're not supposed to get what the Reapers' motives are. Now it seems like we're supposed to, but something ended up on the cutting room floor. Like Harbringer's interest in Shepard.


But maybe it was intentionally designed to be left an unanswered question? At least until ME3.

We still don't know the Reaper's motives. We know how they reproduce, but we do not know why the reproduce, or why they use organics to do this.


But consider, this stuff doesn't come from an arrogant Reaper boasting about how superior they are.  "Essence of a species" is a term used by EDI.  She's supposed to be on our side!  Essence of a species, human smoothie, "humans have it, Protheans didn't", even the fact that this is a form of Reaper reproduction, all comes from this AI that seems to have figured everything out, but can't explain what it's all about to begin with.

Actually, Harbringer boasting that "Those that you call Reapers are your salvation through destruction" is every bit as helpful as EDI's explanation.  And he's the one trying to kill you!


True on all points. The only thing I disagree with is the importance which knowing what essence of a species is would have on the plot line. It simply indicates that the Reapers need organics to survive, which is the important thing. I would like more elaboration on what "essence" is exactly, but that's secondary to understanding that it means the Reapers want us.

#1815
SpiffySquee

SpiffySquee
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Il Divo wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

alright then... to keep things on topic until more opposition comes, Anything on my videos to Smudsy that you disagree with, or wanted better explanation?


Why are you satisfied with ME2's intro?


Well, first keep in mind that I did not see any lead up for ME2 and started the game blind. At the end of ME1 everybody was as happy as an Ewok with a hair brush. We beat a Reaper! We proved it could be done! Shep was on top of the world! And in 10 minutes you lost your ship, your crew, and you life. If that is not a smack to the face I do not know what is. With one move, the Reapers reminded me that I had no idea what I was messing with. A lot of people say that all of this was invalidated by the resurrection. I disagree. The resurrection does not represent infinite lives. This is not Mario Brothers. It represented a second chance. That is it. I don't think Shepard would be brought back a third time.

To me it set a dark tone. Shepard went from being on top, to being at rock bottom. Everything he had worked to build (his team, his reputation with the council, his push to fight the reapers) was taken form him. That is why I liked the opening. I don't care if other people thought it was over the top or did not add to the story. The collectors showed how dangerous they were right off the bat. After that, everything was just a little darker and a little more desperate. To me it says a lot about Shepard. The Collectors killed Shepard, he/she picks themselves up, bushes the dirt off and goes after them. That takes balls. ;)


This pretty much explains my thoughts on the resurrection. I fully understand what some critics mean when they say it was badly implemented, Bioware should have placed Shepard in a coma, etc. The Lazarus Project simply happens, and is never mentioned again. There are mistakes made.

But Squee pretty much hits why I'm still able to forgive the Lazarus Project, despite its flaws. There's something about watching the Normandy's destruction and Shepard hurtling into oblivion which does a terrific job of setting the mood. Especially for any player who didn't have ME2's intro spoiled, it's a dramatic change in tone.


Not to mention one of the coolest "Fade to title" I have ever seen. There is just something about watching all the chaos, then Shep silently floating to oblivion, and then... Mass Effect 2

#1816
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages

Il Divo wrote...

This pretty much explains my thoughts on the resurrection. I fully understand what some critics mean when they say it was badly implemented, Bioware should have placed Shepard in a coma, etc. The Lazarus Project simply happens, and is never mentioned again. There are mistakes made.

But Squee pretty much hits why I'm still able to forgive the Lazarus Project, despite its flaws. There's something about watching the Normandy's destruction and Shepard hurtling into oblivion which does a terrific job of setting the mood. Especially for any player who didn't have ME2's intro spoiled, it's a dramatic change in tone.


And all of that could still have been done without outright killing Shepard.

Exhibit A:  DXHR ;)

Modifié par iakus, 01 septembre 2011 - 09:57 .


#1817
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

111987 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Anyway, "essnece of a species" IMO badly implemented, confusing, leaves us to wonder what the frak just happened. At least in ME1 we know we're not supposed to get what the Reapers' motives are. Now it seems like we're supposed to, but something ended up on the cutting room floor. Like Harbringer's interest in Shepard.


But maybe it was intentionally designed to be left an unanswered question? At least until ME3.

We still don't know the Reaper's motives. We know how they reproduce, but we do not know why the reproduce, or why they use organics to do this.


But consider, this stuff doesn't come from an arrogant Reaper boasting about how superior they are.  "Essence of a species" is a term used by EDI.  She's supposed to be on our side!  Essence of a species, human smoothie, "humans have it, Protheans didn't", even the fact that this is a form of Reaper reproduction, all comes from this AI that seems to have figured everything out, but can't explain what it's all about to begin with.

Actually, Harbringer boasting that "Those that you call Reapers are your salvation through destruction" is every bit as helpful as EDI's explanation.  And he's the one trying to kill you!


True on all points. The only thing I disagree with is the importance which knowing what essence of a species is would have on the plot line. It simply indicates that the Reapers need organics to survive, which is the important thing. I would like more elaboration on what "essence" is exactly, but that's secondary to understanding that it means the Reapers want us.


To me knowing what the essence of a species is is key to knowing what Shepard accomplished in ME2.  Not knowing is like fighting the Battle of the Citadel without understanding why Sovereign is attacking it to begin with.

"If we don't stop him he's gonna do...bad ..stuff...and that's bad!"

#1818
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

This pretty much explains my thoughts on the resurrection. I fully understand what some critics mean when they say it was badly implemented, Bioware should have placed Shepard in a coma, etc. The Lazarus Project simply happens, and is never mentioned again. There are mistakes made.

But Squee pretty much hits why I'm still able to forgive the Lazarus Project, despite its flaws. There's something about watching the Normandy's destruction and Shepard hurtling into oblivion which does a terrific job of setting the mood. Especially for any player who didn't have ME2's intro spoiled, it's a dramatic change in tone.


And all of that could still have been done without outright killing Shepard.

Exhibit A:  DXHR ;)


Certainly. But Human Revolution doesn't have past expectations associated with it. What makes the Mass Effect 2 intro so compelling is that I had already spent 40 + hours with this character. And all that was effectively erased. I didn't previously play an extended adventure as Adam Jensen, which limits the emotional impact of watching him receive surgery. Two very different circumstances. Shepard back from the dead is a more compelling premise than Shepard "back from a coma".

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 septembre 2011 - 10:05 .


#1819
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

To me knowing what the essence of a species is is key to knowing what Shepard accomplished in ME2.  Not knowing is like fighting the Battle of the Citadel without understanding why Sovereign is attacking it to begin with.

"If we don't stop him he's gonna do...bad ..stuff...and that's bad!"


Not really.

"Why make the human Reaper?" and "What is a human Reaper made from?" are two entirely different questions. The answer could simply be technobabble. The important point is that we now know what this cycle is for. The next question is: how did it start? 

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 septembre 2011 - 10:08 .


#1820
SpiffySquee

SpiffySquee
  • Members
  • 372 messages

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

This pretty much explains my thoughts on the resurrection. I fully understand what some critics mean when they say it was badly implemented, Bioware should have placed Shepard in a coma, etc. The Lazarus Project simply happens, and is never mentioned again. There are mistakes made.

But Squee pretty much hits why I'm still able to forgive the Lazarus Project, despite its flaws. There's something about watching the Normandy's destruction and Shepard hurtling into oblivion which does a terrific job of setting the mood. Especially for any player who didn't have ME2's intro spoiled, it's a dramatic change in tone.


And all of that could still have been done without outright killing Shepard.

Exhibit A:  DXHR ;)


Certainly. But Human Revolution doesn't have past expectations associated with it. What makes the Mass Effect 2 intro so compelling is that I had already spent 40 + hours with this character. And all that was effectively erased. I didn't previously play an extended adventure as Adam Jensen, which limits the emotional impact of watching him receive surgery. Two very different circumstances. Shepard back from the dead is a more compelling premise than Shepard "back from a coma".


I think that extra step is important. Otherwise, the Collectors ALMOST killed him. They almost won. They still failed at what they tried to do. Part of me would just write that off as Shepard dodging another bullet. But that is not what happened. They won. They DID kill Shepard. they achieved what they set out to do, and they did it easily. How many times in ME1 and previous history was Shepard almost killed? It is common place for him. It is easy for him to keep on going after a near death. This is different. They killed him. Getting back up from that is a much harder hill to climb. At least for me.

#1821
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages

Il Divo wrote...

Certainly. But Human Revolution doesn't have past expectations associated with it. What makes the Mass Effect 2 intro so compelling is that I had already spent 40 + hours with this character. And all that was effectively erased. I didn't previously play an extended adventure as Adam Jensen, which limits the emotional impact of watching him receive surgery. Two very different circumstances. Shepard back from the dead is a more compelling premise than Shepard "back from a coma".


I'd argue that Human Revolution had at least as much expectation behind it, going back a full decade, but that's neither here nor there;)

But killing Separd only to immediately bring him back through some unknown means ultimately cheapens the entire experience (at least to me).  The loss of the original Normandy was a greater blow to me than Shepard.  Because even though you get the SR2, it's clearly not the same thing.  Great pains were taken to ensure Shepard that he's exactly as he was before "just with a few extra pieces"  Aside from immediate shock value, SHepard's death contributed nothing to game's emotional investment to me.

#1822
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 431 messages

Il Divo wrote...

iakus wrote...

To me knowing what the essence of a species is is key to knowing what Shepard accomplished in ME2.  Not knowing is like fighting the Battle of the Citadel without understanding why Sovereign is attacking it to begin with.

"If we don't stop him he's gonna do...bad ..stuff...and that's bad!"


Not really.

"Why make the human Reaper?" and "What is a human Reaper made from?" are two entirely different questions. The answer could simply be technobabble. The important point is that we now know what this cycle is for. The next question is: how did it start? 


To me the two questions are strongly linked.  I mean, if humans weren't somehow suitable for being Reaperized, there would be no human Reaper now, would there?

#1823
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

I'd argue that Human Revolution had at least as much expectation behind it, going back a full decade, but that's neither here nor there;) 


You're confusing the expectations from the game with expectations from the character. Yes, Deus Ex (much more than Mass Effect 2) had alot of build up surrounding its release. But if you want to compare both character's "resurrections" (and here, I would agree that Jensen's was better handled from a character perspective), there is a huge difference. I was Commander Shepard for a 40+ hour campaign. I controlled him, chose what he would say, romanced Ashley, stopped Saren, etc. Then, while still riding that 'high', I watched the character die. I'm Adam Jensen for 10-15 minutes before he's remade, and so the emotional impact of watching him rebuilt is substantially less.
 

But killing Separd only to immediately bring him back through some unknown means ultimately cheapens the entire experience (at least to me).  The loss of the original Normandy was a greater blow to me than Shepard.  Because even though you get the SR2, it's clearly not the same thing.  Great pains were taken to ensure Shepard that he's exactly as he was before "just with a few extra pieces"  Aside from immediate shock value, SHepard's death contributed nothing to game's emotional investment to me.


I never said that Shepard's death was anything other than shock value. I agree with you there. Hell, did you reach the part in Human Revolution where you find out what happened to the mirror in Adam's apartment? Mass Effect 2 had nothing close to it.

Modifié par Il Divo, 01 septembre 2011 - 10:27 .


#1824
Il Divo

Il Divo
  • Members
  • 9 789 messages

iakus wrote...

To me the two questions are strongly linked.  I mean, if humans weren't somehow suitable for being Reaperized, there would be no human Reaper now, would there?


But you have to demonstrate why the questions are linked. If the Reapers turn every viable species into another Reaper, there's no reason why the "how" will be connected to "the why".

Ex: People theorize that the human Reaper was intended as a vanguard. If this is true, what relevance would this have to how a Reaper is made?

They're two entirely different questions.

#1825
Killjoy Cutter

Killjoy Cutter
  • Members
  • 6 005 messages

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

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. 

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".

You never realize that teck can be armor to protect agenst rediation over time. The ship landed in a shadow and quick got out before leaving. The guns are kept out of the sun because you are getting out of the sun.
Also, armor and metal is what protect things from radiation, like lead.

As I stated before. What your seeing with the shield is just the shield generator getting fried.


Your weapons are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed.  Your radios, suit computers, and so on, are exposed for as long as your shields are, and suffer no degredation while exposed. 

The only logical conclusion is that the shields are being affected in a way that the weapons, suit computers, radios, etc, are not.  That leaves us

As for the shuttle, it has to be exposed for the entire trip down, and the entire trip back up to the Normandy.  In fact, the Normandy itself is exposed if it's not in the shadow of Haestrom. 

A few millimeters of metal won't protect against what the magnetosphere and atmosphere won't protect against, by the way. 

That the thing.
Theirs a thing known as Electromagnetic shielding. http://en.wikipedia....netic_shielding

Electromagnetic shielding
is the process of reducing the electromagnetic field in a space by blocking the field with barriers made of conductive and/or magnetic materials. Shielding is typically applied (1) to enclosures to isolate electrical devices from the 'outside world' and (2) to cables to isolate wires from the environment through which the cable runs. Electromagnetic shielding that blocks radio frequency electromagnetic radiation is also known as RF shielding
.....


Thiers also Radiation protection...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding...



Radiation protection, sometimes known as radiological protection, is the science[citation needed] of protecting people and the environment from the harmful effects of ionizing radiation, which includes both particle radiation and high energy electromagnetic radiation.
Ionizing radiation is widely used in industry and medicine, but presents a significant health hazard. It causes microscopic damage to living tissue, resulting in skin burns and radiation sickness at high exposures and statistically elevated risks of cancer, tumors and genetic damage at low exposures.


Added on....Shielding design...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_shielding#Shielding_design
Shielding reduces the intensity of radiation exponentially depending on the thickness.
This means when added thicknesses are used, the shielding multiplies. For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter is ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is 90 cm (3 ft) of dirt. This reduces gamma rays to 1/1,024 of their original intensity (1/2 multiplied by itself ten times). Halving thicknesses of some materials, that reduce gamma ray intensity by 50% (1/2) include[2]:


That how radiation is blocked in general. Layers of metal can stop and reduce levels of radiation. The shuttle can have heavy amount metel protection to give it time to get to the planet and back and it still landed in a shade to drop you.
Your guns arn't out long enough to get really damaged, like how your shield generator can recover when you are in the shade. The time it would take for your weapons tobe fully damage, ou would be long dead. Let alone every comment on the mission explains the sun is frying equipment.
Metal can reduce the amount of effect of radiation like lead and iron can stop radiation. The thing is on that mission, the radiation was so much that all of it could not be fully stopped, just reduced. In the end any equipment will get fried it it stay long enough in the sun.
What your see is the sheild generator  failing. Not the shield being degraded.


I suggest you dig deeper into the science than a sloppily-quoted Wiki article.