6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Xeranx]

Il Divo wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

"Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. YOUR lives are measured in years and decades. YOU wither and die.  WE are eternal, the pinnical of existance and evolution. Before US, YOU are nothing. YOUR extinction is inevitable. WE are the end of everything." Notice the contrasting here? The seperation between organic, and mechanical.

So what? If I was arrogant to the extreme I could say the same thing to my dinner. I eat a carrot. It becomes a part of me. That does not mean I think I am a carrot. Cars need oil to run. Are cars now oil? Plants need water to survive, does that mean plants are water? Look at the definition for retcon. Does sovy ever say, "I use no organic material in my construction." No? Then it is not a retcon. Period. I don't care what you felt Sovy was implying. Nothing he says goes against what was revealed in ME2. Unless of course you want to start calling your self a fish because you had a tuna sandwich. 

your'e going with that as an argument?........ really?

His argument is perfectly fine. What alot of users don't want to take into account is what I call "point of view". Shepard or Vigil calling the Reapers machines doesn't matter. They are making an assumption based on their immediate perceptions, which is acceptable for them. Sovereign looks like a machine. What a character (or the player) thinks of a topic is not representative of reality. Most people thought Sovereign was an advanced warship. We find out he's a Reaper. Is that a retcon?

His argument is flawed based on the fact he's attributing his thought processes to that of what is supposed to be out of the realm of understanding.  It's supposed to be on the basis of: "What is this?",  "I can't imagine what this does", "We've been at this for years and we're still no closer to understanding this...thing than we were when we first encountered it".

Attributing Sovereigns speech to arrogance doesn't make it so.  As someone else asked, what reason does Sovereign have to lie?  Saren spoke about how Sovereign viewed the Geth.  They are merely tools.    Actually taking this to a ridiculous route for a bit, imagine you have a bunch of tools that are alive and function however they do, but don't know what real purpose they can serve.  If you're building something do you look at your tools as objects that have feelings or a means to a greater end that you know about and said tools probably can't comprehend?  That hammer might think you arrogant for using him to bang on an object whose purpose he doesn't know about, but you aren't feeling the least bit haughty about completing your goal.

In other words, Squee, and anyone else who takes that view, is humanizing Sovereign.  That's the wrong thing to do knowing that we still have ME3 to contend with.  

And now I'm going to wait for people to tear my analogous story to pieces rather than pay attention to what I'm actually saying.  Not saying that's what you'll do.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Again, my own supposition does not bring me into the story, which is why I don't do it. Its my job to experience a story not fill in the gaps. I cannot suppose because I don't know the answer for certain UNLESS supposition is encouraged. This is where exposition becomes key.

[Whatever42]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
Pan's Labirynth did a very good job with exposition. I don't hate the story of ME 2 because it isn't perfect, I hate it because it isn't good. There is something wrong with the story at every single fundemental moment in the plot. The same is not true with every other piece of fiction.

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. My problems with the ME2 story isn't the fundemental plot or the general quality of the writing, which I think is very good. 

Take the dirty dozen or the seven samuri. Those movies are about the characters. The love affair between the young samuri and the peasant girl that could never be was a very important, well-told part of the story. ME2 has very well told character stories too so I have no complaints there. My problem with ME2 is that while in the seven samuri, the central story was still the most riveting part of the movie, in ME2, the central plot is almost drowned out. 

For me, this really caused the game to drag about 2/3rds of the way through. The central plot, while fundementally fine, lacked the reveals, coolness, and intensity that we got in the character missions or in the ME1 main plot. 

I just don't see the point of quibbling over how fast Shepard was entering the atmo or whether TIM should have blockaded the Omega 4 relay, at least not as part of a literary critique - I'm happy to nerd out and imagine other courses of action.

I actually would enjoy far more exposition as well, as long as it were entirely optional. However, Bioware has said that its their goal to actually get most of their players to listen to most of the conversations and finish the game. Right now, their metrics show them improving and that they are actually doing quite well compared to other games.

Activison reported that only 10% of players actually completed RDR while Bioware metrics showed 50% of players finished ME2. So I don't think they are barking up the wrong tree. Do you?

[Notlikeyoucare]

Xeranx wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

"Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. YOUR lives are measured in years and decades. YOU wither and die.  WE are eternal, the pinnical of existance and evolution. Before US, YOU are nothing. YOUR extinction is inevitable. WE are the end of everything." Notice the contrasting here? The seperation between organic, and mechanical.

So what? If I was arrogant to the extreme I could say the same thing to my dinner. I eat a carrot. It becomes a part of me. That does not mean I think I am a carrot. Cars need oil to run. Are cars now oil? Plants need water to survive, does that mean plants are water? Look at the definition for retcon. Does sovy ever say, "I use no organic material in my construction." No? Then it is not a retcon. Period. I don't care what you felt Sovy was implying. Nothing he says goes against what was revealed in ME2. Unless of course you want to start calling your self a fish because you had a tuna sandwich. 

your'e going with that as an argument?........ really?

His argument is perfectly fine. What alot of users don't want to take into account is what I call "point of view". Shepard or Vigil calling the Reapers machines doesn't matter. They are making an assumption based on their immediate perceptions, which is acceptable for them. Sovereign looks like a machine. What a character (or the player) thinks of a topic is not representative of reality. Most people thought Sovereign was an advanced warship. We find out he's a Reaper. Is that a retcon?

His argument is flawed based on the fact he's attributing his thought processes to that of what is supposed to be out of the realm of understanding.  It's supposed to be on the basis of: "What is this?",  "I can't imagine what this does", "We've been at this for years and we're still no closer to understanding this...thing than we were when we first encountered it".

Attributing Sovereigns speech to arrogance doesn't make it so.  As someone else asked, what reason does Sovereign have to lie?  Saren spoke about how Sovereign viewed the Geth.  They are merely tools.    Actually taking this to a ridiculous route for a bit, imagine you have a bunch of tools that are alive and function however they do, but don't know what real purpose they can serve.  If you're building something do you look at your tools as objects that have feelings or a means to a greater end that you know about and said tools probably can't comprehend?  That hammer might think you arrogant for using him to bang on an object whose purpose he doesn't know about, but you aren't feeling the least bit haughty about completing your goal.

In other words, Squee, and anyone else who takes that view, is humanizing Sovereign.  That's the wrong thing to do knowing that we still have ME3 to contend with.  

And now I'm going to wait for people to tear my analogous story to pieces rather than pay attention to what I'm actually saying.  Not saying that's what you'll do.

Sovereigns statements seem supported somewhat by the fact that he smashed through the Citidial fleet. Yes I know the Geth were helping him but still. It seems they had no problem taking down the Geth once Sovereign went down. But thats supposition.

[Whatever42]

Xeranx wrote...

His argument is flawed based on the fact he's attributing his thought processes to that of what is supposed to be out of the realm of understanding.  It's supposed to be on the basis of: "What is this?",  "I can't imagine what this does", "We've been at this for years and we're still no closer to understanding this...thing than we were when we first encountered it".

Attributing Sovereigns speech to arrogance doesn't make it so.  As someone else asked, what reason does Sovereign have to lie?  Saren spoke about how Sovereign viewed the Geth.  They are merely tools.    Actually taking this to a ridiculous route for a bit, imagine you have a bunch of tools that are alive and function however they do, but don't know what real purpose they can serve.  If you're building something do you look at your tools as objects that have feelings or a means to a greater end that you know about and said tools probably can't comprehend?  That hammer might think you arrogant for using him to bang on an object whose purpose he doesn't know about, but you aren't feeling the least bit haughty about completing your goal.

In other words, Squee, and anyone else who takes that view, is humanizing Sovereign.  That's the wrong thing to do knowing that we still have ME3 to contend with.  

And now I'm going to wait for people to tear my analogous story to pieces rather than pay attention to what I'm actually saying.  Not saying that's what you'll do.

I also don't tell my tools that they're worthless and that I'm going to destroy them.

For some reason, it was important to Sovereign to explain this to Shepard.  It was probably just a villain's monologue, of course, but it was not the actions of a machine.

[Someone With Mass]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I actually would enjoy far more exposition as well, as long as it were entirely optional. However, Bioware has said that its their goal to actually get most of their players to listen to most of the conversations and finish the game. Right now, their metrics show them improving and that they are actually doing quite well compared to other games.

Activison reported that only 10% of players actually completed RDR while Bioware metrics showed 50% of players finished ME2. So I don't think they are barking up the wrong tree. Do you?

That's true.

I know that it's my goal to play and finish the game, at least. Explaining how a thermal clip works in detail would just drag the whole thing down, when I can just look it up in the Codex whenever I feel like it. It's also a little bad to place explenations like that at the start of a game, as I don't want to spend twenty minutes listening to Miranda and Jacob talking and talking after I've pretty much done nothing but watching a very long cutscene.
I want to get the show on the road, not play Metal Gear Solid 4. 

[Notlikeyoucare]

Perhaps I should elaborate on that point further. The point was amidst all that rambling, Sovereign makes a clear distinction between organic life and what the Reapers are. If Reapers were partly organic, then they are just as much of an accident as those they are Reaping. Reapers are refered to multiple times as mechanical beings, meaning, no organic components whatsoever, because that would make them cyborgs, which is not mechanical.

And also:

"Before us, you are nothing"

But they need us to procreate? WWHHAAATTT?

[Sgt Stryker]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Yes but the thing is, the story must explain that this is feesable. The writer is supposed to write a plot, the audience should not have to deduce this by reading lines of secondary source material. We don't even know if it is plausable, because the writer did not take the time to do so.

I'll agree with you there. If Shepard was given the opportunity to ask how his body was not incinerated and mangled during the Alchera incident, and a plausible explanation was given (like the one I proposed), I think that would have been more than enough.

[Notlikeyoucare]

AND ALSO: "Who built you?"
"We have no beggining, we have no end, we are infinite"

So, if they need organics in order to procreate, that means they need a beggining, that means they'd have to have organic life in order to begin.

But Sovereigns statement implys they always were.

Maybe Sovereign was lying. If so, for what reason would he have to lie?

Maybe they're reasoning is beyond our comprehension?

If so, that implies that Sovereign was not lying.

So which is it?

What the F*** is going on!!!?????

[Whatever42]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Perhaps I should elaborate on that point further. The point was amidst all that rambling, Sovereign makes a clear distinction between organic life and what the Reapers are. If Reapers were partly organic, then they are just as much of an accident as those they are Reaping. Reapers are refered to multiple times as mechanical beings, meaning, no organic components whatsoever, because that would make them cyborgs, which is not mechanical.

And also:

"Before us, you are nothing"

But they need us to procreate? WWHHAAATTT?

Oh, I agree that needs to be explained. But I think it will be. I believe it's fundemental to the story.

Why do Reapers need to procreate?

Personally, I predict we'll find out that the Reapers were once an organic species. That machine cultists among the original species propelled them into their current manifestation. 

Why harvest any races? Why let them advance? I believe its because as eternal, unchanging beings that they value the accident of evolution. That take species that evolve into something useful and incorporate them into the Reaper collective. 

That's all wild speculation, of course, but something motivates the Reapers to act as they do and we will find out.

[CaineMaster]

Quick question, are we even sure that all reapers have biological part to them? As far as I know we are just assuming that all of the reapers are the same as the baby reaper and have a biological milkshake in them, maybe the baby reaper was the first one to be created like this. Can someone answer this for me?

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
So if we make the assumption that Shepard's body is intact (which it shouldn't be). How would an oxygen deprived brain be able to retain memories of who the person previously was?

The same way Cerberus restarted dead blood cells. Technology.

The one thing that kills the revivification process in ME2's opening sequence is that they'd never be able to restore Shep's mind.   Too much of what a person is, is stored in a way that's lost when a brain takes that much damage.  It's physically impossible, and don't say "technology".  You can't restore lost information from nothing.

[littlezack]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

AND ALSO: "Who built you?"
"We have no beggining, we have no end, we are infinite"

So, if they need organics in order to procreate, that means they need a beggining, that means they'd have to have organic life in order to begin.

But Sovereigns statement implys they always were.

Maybe Sovereign was lying. If so, for what reason would he have to lie?

Maybe they're reasoning is beyond our comprehension?

If so, that implies that Sovereign was not lying.

So which is it?

What the F*** is going on!!!?????

I honestly got the impression he was just exaggerating. Not so much lying as trumping himself.

[Someone With Mass]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

The one thing that kills the revivification process in ME2's opening sequence is that they'd never be able to restore Shep's mind.   Too much of what a person is, is stored in a way that's lost when a brain takes that much damage.  It's physically impossible, and don't say "technology".  You can't restore lost information from nothing.

Well, they found a way. While I agree that it could've used some more details, I won't hold it against BioWare for trying to escape from explaining something that's supposed to be impossible, as it can be a pretty difficult thing to do. 

[Sgt Stryker]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Except we already know Kinetic barriers can't protect agaisnt either. Collision with a planet? There is no barrier that can protect you from that.

Why not? Why do you think objects get hot when they enter a planetary atmosphere? Because of friction (high-speed collisions with gas molecules). Hmm, you need protection against small objects travelling at rapid velocities? Sounds like a job for kinetic barriers!

As far as impact with the planet is concerned, that one is still up in the air. If I could crunch the numbers and compare the energies of a Shepard-sized object falling at terminal velocity versus a grain of metal travelling at a fraction of c, I would. However, there are too many unknowns at this time.

Of course, this is still something that should have been explained in the narrative, since the death of the protagonist is Serious Business.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
As I said before, what your seeing on Haestrom is the shield generator going out, not the shields being attacked directly.

Is this actually said in the game?  "Fries your shields" is the phrase that's used repeatedly, and isn't specific as to what's going on. 

Given the other observable facts, it is highly unlikely that the barrier generators themselves are being affected, or the Normandy and the shuttle would also lose their barriers.  The shuttle has to spend longer in direct exposure to the star than Shep ever does.  And all the other equipment that is not harmed  is exposed for just as long as the barrier generators in the armor.  The radios and computers built into the same armor are not affected. 

Unless you can come up with a canon-compatible way in which the squad's kinetic barrier systems are more vulnerable than any other piece of equipment they're carrying, you have an unaddressed contradition in your theory. 

Given how the barriers work and what they do, they'd be affected by particle radiation.  We see the personal barriers fail when exposed directly to the star.  Draw a straight line. 

And again, the shell of a gun or the metal in an armored suit would not be enough to step particle radiation energetic enough to have just punched clean through Haestrom's magnetic field and through miles and miles of atmosphere. 

That's the thing, all forms of rediation can be block with layers of cover. Which was my point in  my sorce I put up, Particl Radiation maybe stop by sheilds, but that does not mean it's th only radiation in an environment. Now, I never said it stops the radiation, only the it reduses it. In all form of radiation protection Layers of Metal and material is used  to hold it back. Hence sorce....http://en.wikipedia....hielding_design
Are you really telling me layers of high dense metal does not stop or delay radiation?

On point the radiation you deal with on Haestrom is solar radiation. http://www.youtube.c...864ynxhbk#t=17s
The fact that life can still live on Haestrom and you are on it with no helmet on and your only effective in the sun show it's not heavly hit with partical radiation. Especilly since it's in solar wind, cosmic radiation, and neutron flux in nuclear reactors. http://en.wikipedia....es_of_radiation.

Also, it's stated the sun light on the planet fries tech.....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5D4jXy4XIw&feature=player_detailpage#t=132s


Your walking out in the sun. Your Shield generator is being fried being that it's tech and as it's being fried the genorator is losing power. THat's what your seeing. It's not the shield themselves be degrading.

I'm not telling you that metal won't mitigate particle radiation, I'm telling you that the amount of metal in the weapons and armor is not enough to stop the kind of particle radiation that makes it through a planet's magnetic field and atmosphere and still has enough power to have the effects that we see. 

If it were simply intense heating from the visible / IR / UV light, the barriers wouldn't stop the effects AT ALL, the squad would just start cooking as soon as they stepped out of the shadows.  Instead, we see a delay as the barriers fail over time.  If it were heating causing the barriers to fail, other equipment would fail -- guns would go though thermal clips faster while out of the shadows, for example.  And sealed helmets would be needed to avoid breathing in the superheated air. 

So why are the barriers the ONLY tech we see being affected? 

I'm not say any amout of layers will stop it. I'm say added layers will reduce the effects. Reduce.
And the squad did start cooking as soon as they get in the sun. They clearly tell you.
And it's not a imedate effect. It happens overtime, that why I refferto "Reduce."
And the gun are never out long enough to show effect. Why? Because you have to be in the sun. By the time effect are shown, Shep would be dead.
 
As for why the shield is shown to be the only tech to be effected, It's the only tech you have on that  would show an indication it's failing.

So all the other equipment the squad is carrying is fine until long after Shep and squad would be dead, but the kinetic barrier systems in their armor all fail in seconds? 

Do you have a hypothesis on why that is?

Do you have a hypothesis on why the barriers degrade over several seconds, instead of at once? 

Do you have a hypothesis on why the weapons, radios, and computers don't degrade over several seconds and then fail?

[Whatever42]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
So if we make the assumption that Shepard's body is intact (which it shouldn't be). How would an oxygen deprived brain be able to retain memories of who the person previously was?

The same way Cerberus restarted dead blood cells. Technology.

The one thing that kills the revivification process in ME2's opening sequence is that they'd never be able to restore Shep's mind.   Too much of what a person is, is stored in a way that's lost when a brain takes that much damage.  It's physically impossible, and don't say "technology".  You can't restore lost information from nothing.

While time travel is likely impossible and FTL is likely impossible, retoring a person's brain is not actually impossible, just very difficult.

Even today, we are developing technology to discern specific thoughts from brain scans. In two hundred years, with a complete model to work from, being able to restore a brain is very plausible. 

Now the only question would be is where did they get that model from. Shepard was injured at the end of ME1. It's likely they would have taken complete scans of him. Cerberus could have used that information to reconstruct the memories. Yes, the last couple weeks memories would have had to have been fabricated but that's more than possible as well.

We accept FTL and time travel because they are well known devices in science fiction. However, science fiction routinely minimizes medical technology. I suspect this is because they still want danger and death and being able to rebuild someone would minimize that too much. However, in two hundred years we very likely will not be travelling FTL but we will very likely be able to reconstruct almost any part of the body.

[Sgt Stryker]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Pan's Labirynth did a very good job with exposition. I don't hate the story of ME 2 because it isn't perfect, I hate it because it isn't good. There is something wrong with the story at every single fundemental moment in the plot. The same is not true with every other piece of fiction.

You clearly have never experienced the awesomeness that is Turkish Star Wars.

[Someone With Mass]

CaineMaster wrote...

Quick question, are we even sure that all reapers have biological part to them? As far as I know we are just assuming that all of the reapers are the same as the baby reaper and have a biological milkshake in them, maybe the baby reaper was the first one to be created like this. Can someone answer this for me?

Well, EDI says that all the information she got from the human Reaper was just speculation and that it might be the Reaper equivalent of reproduction, so that is a good question.

It could just as easily have been a improvised way for the Collectors and Harbinger to make another Reaper. Then again, there's this.

Uncut, but it might mean something.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

The one thing that kills the revivification process in ME2's opening sequence is that they'd never be able to restore Shep's mind.   Too much of what a person is, is stored in a way that's lost when a brain takes that much damage.  It's physically impossible, and don't say "technology".  You can't restore lost information from nothing.

Well, they found a way. While I agree that it could've used some more details, I won't hold it against BioWare for trying to escape from explaining something that's supposed to be impossible, as it can be a pretty difficult thing to do. 

Or, they could have written the whole thing in such a way as to not require the impossible... 

[Whatever42]

CaineMaster wrote...

Quick question, are we even sure that all reapers have biological part to them? As far as I know we are just assuming that all of the reapers are the same as the baby reaper and have a biological milkshake in them, maybe the baby reaper was the first one to be created like this. Can someone answer this for me?

Sovey and Harby have very distinct personalities, not at all machine-like. Compare them to an organic and then compare them to Geth. Who do they most resemble?

Throw in the indoctrination field and their proven ability in ME1 and ME2 to merge machine and organic, they seem very cyborg to me.

[Someone With Mass]

I honestly just think Shepard's death was BioWare's way to let the player choose class and move the story ahead a couple of years, as well as change the setting.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
So if we make the assumption that Shepard's body is intact (which it shouldn't be). How would an oxygen deprived brain be able to retain memories of who the person previously was?

The same way Cerberus restarted dead blood cells. Technology.

The one thing that kills the revivification process in ME2's opening sequence is that they'd never be able to restore Shep's mind.   Too much of what a person is, is stored in a way that's lost when a brain takes that much damage.  It's physically impossible, and don't say "technology".  You can't restore lost information from nothing.

While time travel is likely impossible and FTL is likely impossible, retoring a person's brain is not actually impossible, just very difficult.

Even today, we are developing technology to discern specific thoughts from brain scans. In two hundred years, with a complete model to work from, being able to restore a brain is very plausible. 

Now the only question would be is where did they get that model from. Shepard was injured at the end of ME1. It's likely they would have taken complete scans of him. Cerberus could have used that information to reconstruct the memories. Yes, the last couple weeks memories would have had to have been fabricated but that's more than possible as well.

We accept FTL and time travel because they are well known devices in science fiction. However, science fiction routinely minimizes medical technology. I suspect this is because they still want danger and death and being able to rebuild someone would minimize that too much. However, in two hundred years we very likely will not be travelling FTL but we will very likely be able to reconstruct almost any part of the body.

There's time travel in ME? 

Anyway, I guess I can give you the "brain scan" thing, I suppose.  It's certainly a bit more plausible once you have the information that was lost... the big hurdles are having enough detail, and making that information back into a working brain...

[Someone With Mass]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Or, they could have written the whole thing in such a way as to not require the impossible... 

How, exactly?

If it's impossible, it's still impossible even if you change it.

[Sgt Stryker]

Someone With Mass wrote...

I honestly just think Shepard's death was BioWare's way to let the player choose class and move the story ahead a couple of years, as well as change the setting.

And force Shepard into the hands of Cerberus. For some reason it seems like they made an effort to really focus on TIM's story, almost like it should overshadow Shepard's part in the story. But isn't the entire ME trilogy meant to be Shepard's story?