[quote]Terror_K wrote...
I'm not. Everybody here who is complaining about the breathing masks is on the same page. You don't seem to be, given your comments. Nobody is saying that "breathing masks are unrealistic" as you put it; they're all saying that they are unsuitable given the circumstances.[/quote]
If anything, it would appear that it's you who didn't realize what I was saying.
You don't represent anyone, because as the "magnetism" argument illustrates, not everyone is on the same page. You
wish they were on the same page, that's the difference.
Some people claim that it breaks science(!), other that it breaks lore, and others just don't like how they look.
The claims of everyone being on the same page are completely fabricated, and with the obvious motivation to attach you with credibility over another group of people (the mainstream crowd), that you don't have.
[quote]You should know full well that when I am referring to "space" I'm not being quite so literal. That should be immediately evident in the general nature of the comments. When I say "space" I mean in in a more general sense, i.e. exploring alien worlds, moons, stars, quasars, black holes, vacuums, asteroids, etc. I'm referring to the overall nature of space exploration and traveling and what it entails, not merely the most literal "space" as in the void of nowhere between heavenly bodies.[/quote]
First off, you most definitely aren't exploring stars, quarasars and black holes. You are once again using words for dramatic effect.
Secondly, you are not visiting entirely alien worlds. Every single worlds you land on has been detected before, and you know the consistency of its atmosphere. It's not truly
alien.
Thirdly, I specifically called you out on using "space" for dramatic effect. What part of you admitting that you used "space" just because it sounds so exotic and ohgoshwhatstheconsistencyoftheatmospherewhatdoidowhatdoido thinks that it remedies that?
You want to establish the pseudofact that the planets that you visited in ME2 were entirely unhospitable, not to mention unpredictable. They were not. They were predictable and to a very great extent, hospitable. In fact, a great percentag of them, have to do with visiting settled bases.
[quote]It's linked. Breathing masks are a symptom of the overall direction ME2 shifted in with the sequel. The masks alone aren't an issue: what the squaddies wear as a whole is. Breathing masks showing up again in ME3 screenshots illustrates that despite many players having issues with them in ME2, the devs haven't really listened and are bringing back impractical outfits again, despite comments that proper armour and helmets were making a return. It just illustrates overall that they continue to not give a damn about the integrity of their own universe and are keeping up this silly "rule of cool" approach.[/quote]
Actually, as I have already demonestrated, and as you completely decided to ignore, there is plenty of space magic in the universe, especially in ME1. ME1 introduces an extremelly softcore universe, with plenty of contradictions to scientific facts. The first thing that we'll have to do, once we have established that, is throw away any claims about "x not being realistic enough" and generally "ban" any buzzwords such as "realistic", "scientific","logical", or whatever word you choose to incorrectly attach to your argument.
The "rule of cool" is an overused trope. I am not sure if you even fully understand it.
The "rule of cool" applies, if not mostly, a lot, in sci-fi, when it comes to contradictions with science. Seeing as ME1 is the one that introduces a universe with Twillight Zonish concepts and whatnot, it is already greatly guilty of that trope.
The inclusion of explosions, boobs, romances, and generally things that you dislike and make you complain non-stop for two years, do not fall by themselves under the rule of cool.
So, if you are implying that ME2 went ahead and challenged scientific facts (hence the only way it could invoke the rule of cool in this subject),more than you can handle, in comparison to ME1, (hence the "taking a new direction") I'll ask you to take a big, hard look on Mass Effect 1.
Omni-gel tales, geth lasers, airplanes, it really is a Shepardblur.
Not to mention:
[quote]
Indoctrination,Dragon's Teeth,Species evolution,Thermal Sinks (Also Known as Tactical Nightmares),Mass modification,An element with NO protons,FTL,Mass Relays,Geth Barriers with no projectors (It's funny, because at least the omni-blades make sense)[/quote]
What does ME2 introduce again? Fancy clothing that would be totally okay from a sci-fi comic of the 40s? Oh, yeah, I thought so.
[quote]You've forgotten the chlorine gas already? And some of the other examples of overly hot and cold worlds others have posted in this thread.[/quote]
Yeah, examples, examples. Which ones, exactly?
You already know that pulling the chloride gas is a lost cause. The game actually responds to the toxicity, something that ME1 failed to demonestrate. In fact, I support that the reason that squadmates in ME1 get away with wearing outfits unprotective to not one, but all planets, but simply shrugging it off, with no comment whatsoever, is a clear sign of the excessive rule of cool present throughout ME1.
Funny how that works, hm.
Cynicism and whatnot aside, this is a pretty clear introduction of the universe into the trope. ME1 squadmates don't suddenly scream "OH MY EYES! MY EYES!" because the game considers that it's okay to do so, even if it violates simple logic. It falls perfectly under the definition of the rule of cool.
[quote]Not at all. They can only do so much, because it's realistic that there'd be upper and lower limits to how much your suit can tolerate certain elements once they get to certain extremes. I enjoyed that element and wished they'd actually built upon it for ME2 rather than just thrown it out.[/quote]
It is what?
Realistic?
That planets with corpses nowhere near vehicles (meaning that they survived just fine for quite some time) are realistic?
That cold or heat only get to you after a specific amount of time?
It's unrealistic, and you are simply suspending your disbelief towards it, voluntarily, hence practicing the rule of cool over that unrealistic gameplay mechanic.
[quote]For the record, I believe that there is a place for mainstream games. What I don't feel is that all games should be made for the same, single, overcatered for audience. There's plenty of games out there for the masses, many of which I also enjoy. That doesn't mean Mass Effect should be retooled to suit them instead of being designed for the people it was originally aimed at. Simply put: BioWare shouldn't be changing their nerd games to suit jocks.[/quote]
No, you see, Terror, it's you who says that BioWare has been consistent in making nerd games. If you look at any list of BioWare games ever, you'll see that they change styles all the time. You again claim that the mainstream crowd is overcatered.
Well, deal with it.
They are the main consumers, they have the big money that the folks over at BioWare use to feed pancakes to their children every morning. That "overcatered" crowd is also the one that made Dark Souls and Skyrim a success.
The only thing consistent here is actually you, in saying that ME1 was a "nerd" game, whereas ME2 was a "jock" game. First of all, let me congratulate you for instilling stereotypes. I honestly don't care if you call yourself a nerd or a geek, but the sheer suggestion that a specific kind of games holds some sort of intellectual power that only fits in only one of those two stereotypized groups is laughable.
ME1 had plenty of explosions, plenty of rule of cool, it was extremely easy, and it certainly didn't require more brain power than ME2 did.
[quote]Also, there's plenty of proof that RPGs can still be popular and sell well, not least of all the original Dragon Age, the Fallout titles and Skyrim, the latter of which has seen massive success, and it even has a worse inventory than ME1 did. [/quote]
Skyrim has a very interesting system for an inventory. For the sake of whatever is holy, please stop comparing its inventory to that of ME1. No game should be compared to ME1 in terms of inventory management.
Profit for DA:O, FO and the TES games didn't originate from a niche market. Otherwise, they wouldn't sell well. They sold to the mainstream market, and the fact that you can hold a conversation about them with even a casual gamer (especially Oblivion/Skyrim and FO:NV/3) is a testament to that.
Just because every single RPG you see must be a "nerde game" simply because it falls under that genre, is purely illogical, because the people who purchased them fall under the definition of a mainstream gamer. Everyone knows that Skyrim is a "hot" game.
To make matters worse, you go ahead and act as if it requires any brain power to manage an inventory. You just lose brain cells in the process. It doesn't take any kind of skill to put yourself through that.
[quote]This has already since been covered by another poster. Exposed skin in their environment could still be dangerous to them and decontamination isn't going to guarrantee that if they're showing skin and sweating, producing emo tears, were to get cut, etc. like Jack is very likely to do. That's why in Ascension the humans boarding the fleet needed to not only wait for a decontamination team, but all had to wear sealed suits with helmets before boarding too. Suddenly in ME2 that's no longer the case and a quick spray is fine. Bringing anybody beyond Tali, Garrus and Legion to the fleet just makes a mockery of Drew's novel and the lines from Tali before docking.[/quote]
And I have already answered to that post.
I still can't come close to understanding why you thought that human germs are an actual danger to quarians, more than any foreign material, at least.
[quote]
Suddenly in ME2 that's no longer the case and a quick spray is fine. [/quote]
I assume that you are aware of how the process works or did "quick spray" sound like big enough a derogatory term to use at the time?
[quote]They didn't have them in ME1 for starters, since that was an explanation in ME2 for the regenerating health, where it also stated it as being small pockets of medigel in
armour that detected the wearer's health and distributed it as needed. The point isn't so much the delivery method as to where the gel is actually being stored. Granted most squaddies here would in theory be fine, despite the system being attributed to armour, but once again Jack is the biggest concern here.[/quote]
As that "other poster" has explained, it doesn't matter where it's stored. You don't know how big the packets of medi-gel are (in fact, you should, because Retribution specifically says that a very small amount could lead to overdose) or where the tubes are located.
I hate to break it to you, but if you don't accept this explanation, then the power "Unity", first introduced in ME1, becomes another element of space magic.
[quote]While this has also been covered by another poster,[/quote]
No, it has not. You just didn't read his post carefully enough.
He specifically talks about off-screen refueling of breathable air, while you are debating on on-screen refueling.
[quote]I believe Tali breathes the same air most of the time, but it is merely filtered via her mask and suit. She cleans the existing air around her rather than having a whole new supply. Beyond that, as otherwise stated, it could happen off-screen and small tanks of filter air could be outfitted.[/quote]
I see, so Tali's mask can now be used as a filter? I hate to wonder, does that happen because it covers all the face? Because it would seem as if there is a problem with masks that cover only part of the face. Apparently, they are very similar to "bubbles of breathable air".
Small tanks? May I ask where those are located? I didn't see any bulks on her outfit. Maybe they are located in her hips? Or her rear?
Double standards.
[quote]I'm not exactly sure, because I don't believe it's been stated outright. I also have no idea how big that would have to be, and considering they're synthetic lifeforms it could be any part of them.
They do have flashlight heads though... just saying.[/quote]
Well, that's fascinating, because I recall some annoying barriers on Noveria blocking my way, even after I had killed all the geth. And they seemed to still light up.
Sure, it's still the rule of cool, but it's ME1, so it's okay.
[quote]Anything you sweat out for one.[/quote]
Have you experienced a situation where sweat was literally dripping from non-facial parts of the body and being left behind on ships? I haven't.
[quote]Space (again, not the most literal use of the term) is filled with various radiations. In fact, there's radiation in the more literal definition of space too. Too close to a sun, there's radiation. If you come across a natural source of eezo, there's a good chance of radiation too. Whether it was referenced directly on a planet in ME1 or not, it's out there. It was never a hazard directly because the suits dealt with it.[/quote]
By, "in ME1?" I was asking you for a source, just so that you know. Not your personal theory.
[quote]And how were ME1 hardsuits terrible survival suits exactly? They protected against extreme temperatures, radiation, toxins, pressure, etc. Some nipple straps and a breathing mask don't do that.[/quote]
A suit that doesn't protect you for more than ten seconds is NOT, under any definition a real survival suit, as it fails to accomplish its most basic goal.
You know, being built to actually help you survive.
[quote]When people have a job to do in real life, they are realistically equipped for it. That was the case in ME1, but not the case in ME2. The only reason it wasn't so obvious was because by a sheer amount of luck there were only a few places we went in ME2 that actually represented what planets are realistically like out there, since most ME2 worlds were class M locations. But despite this, most of the crew weren't prepared for anything else realistically, and these are supposed to be a squad formed to deal with these types of things. If the Collector base on the suicide mission at the end had been in a vaccuum, been too hot or cold, given off radiation or strong toxins and gasses, Shepard would have lost then and there because his/her team would have been unprepared. It's like preparing for a mission to the moon and having Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and co. but they've all boarded the rocket/shuttle with shorts and t-shirts.[/quote]
Luck? Okay. I suppose that you would feel better if there were a dozen more locations which you couldn't visit because they weren't worth the risk?
Every single location that you visited, and yes, that includes the CB, was not entirely uncharted or unknown. You fully knew what kind of atmosphere you were to be dealing with. In fact, the CB is a particularly bad example, since it is inaccessible by any kind of vehicle and you can't exactly run back to the Normandy once the hazard has kicked in. Not in 10 seconds anyway.
In fact, a good example of this, is the one that you just dismissed after misusing it. Firefighters.
A firefighter, despite his or her function would not deal with the fire in a nuclear energy station without the proper equipment. I'd wager that most fire depts, due to their decentralized nature, do not have that kind of equipment.
It has nothing to do with luck. Just people with the common sense to restrain themselves with interacting with hazards they are not equipped properly against.
[quote]Which is kind of my point. They were never prepared for it realistically, and when they
did visit the few worlds with serious environmental hazards (which despite your claims did exist, albeit rare) it was treated like breathing masks and exposed skin was fine.
[/quote]
Nope. That was Mass Effect 1. Not Mass Effect 2.
In Mass Effect 2, the two planets with actual enviromental hazards had direct effects on how your squad reacted.
[quote]scyphozoa wrote...
The breathing masks are absurd for a couple of reasons. They aren't remotely realistic, I am willing to bend physics a little in a sci-fi game, but at no time in any amount of science fiction can organic tissue be exposed to the vacuum of space, thats just a basic principle of all space.[/quote]
When did anyone, ever get exposed to vacuum?
Modifié par Phaedon, 02 janvier 2012 - 12:03 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
