223 réponses à ce sujet

[my Aim is True]

rma2110 wrote...

Any explosion you can see from that far in space is bad news.

Yeah you can see it from the galaxy map, that's pretty big.  And Joker was having to outrun the shockwave, which makes me assume it is destructive.

I haven't watche the 'Final Hours of Mass Effect' ap, but I saw a screen grab with a flowchart that says the Crucible causes a galactic dark age.  So they didn't intend for it to wipe out everyone, it's just poor writing.

[Dean_the_Young]

Eyeshield21 wrote...

Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...

In Arrival, it wasn't just the destruction with an asteroid that the loe said would blow up the entire starsystem, it's the destruction of a Mass Relay. Anytime a Mass Relay is destroyed, so Arrival indicated, it would result in a catastrophic event.

Furthermore, destroying the Mass Relay Network is bringing about a new Dark Age...exactly what we tried to prevent. So, why did we play this game again?

This.

Not this, because it was the relay but the energy inside the relay that caused estruction. If the energy inside the relay is used, then it won't have an Arrival effect.

Nor was Shepard's story about preventing a new Dark Age, it was about preventing the total genophage of space-faring species.

[ticklefist]

NGC1300 wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

Well it's pretty obvious we're supposed to assume it doesn't. It just seems like a design decision made out of convenience. It's not convincing. Since it's not convincing we carry on with what has been properly established instead of following tacked on last minute garbage lore.

sorry, I'm a bit lost here. no offense, but you meant to say because it is not convincing for us to believe that the explosion doesn't kill everything so we have to assume that the explosion works as how it did in The Arrival, which kills everything?

Not only in the Arrival but also in your codex for this very game.

[VendettaI154]

We were given no information that said otherwise.

[afarkas1]

NGC1300 wrote...

title says it all. How do you know for sure that the destruction of the mass relay will destroy everything? I know you got an idea from The Arrival, but that was an asteroid, in the endings it was the crucible's energy. How do you know the consequences are the same if the destruction was caused by totally different things?

and I'm pretty sure nobody knows completely what the energy from the crucible can actually do.

so why people are so certain that it must kill everything?

been seeing this a lot, so I'm just asking.

If it weren't dangerous, why would the Normandy be running away from it? When the energy wave his the ship, you can see an engine breaking off. Looks pretty destructive to me.

The problem is that everything from after Anderson dies is so poorly explained that nobody knows what happened, so it really wasn't an ending at all. If you did the same thing with, say, Terminator 2, you would cut from the middle of the final battle, to a conversation where T-1000 tries to explain that he needs to kill John Connor to save humanity, to Arnie being lowered into the liquid metal, without any explanation.

Modifié par afarkas1, 01 avril 2012 - 03:45 .

[Dean_the_Young]

my Aim is True wrote...

rma2110 wrote...

Any explosion you can see from that far in space is bad news.

Yeah you can see it from the galaxy map, that's pretty big.  And Joker was having to outrun the shockwave, which makes me assume it is destructive.

Joker wasn't outrunning the shockwave of an explosion: Joker was outrunning the Crucible effect. Which, as you can see any any High Assets ending, can pass through structures and people and planets without destroying them.


You aren't seeing supernovas from the galaxxy map, which themselves aren't nearly big enough to justify even if they were the right color. You're seeing the FTL-speed of the Crucible Effect expanding from the relays.

[Dean_the_Young]

ticklefist wrote...

NGC1300 wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

Well it's pretty obvious we're supposed to assume it doesn't. It just seems like a design decision made out of convenience. It's not convincing. Since it's not convincing we carry on with what has been properly established instead of following tacked on last minute garbage lore.

sorry, I'm a bit lost here. no offense, but you meant to say because it is not convincing for us to believe that the explosion doesn't kill everything so we have to assume that the explosion works as how it did in The Arrival, which kills everything?

Not only in the Arrival but also in your codex for this very game.

The Codex is in the game is based on Arrival, which is the only known example of a relay being broken.


But the reason the realy in Arrival triggered a supernova was because all the energy inside it was released at once, rather than channeled in some other form.

[ZeroSum7]

The mass relays have the most powerful mass effect engines in the galaxy, and in "Arrival", when one was destroyed it mimicked a supernova because of the energy it has. Judging by the explosion of the relay in the ending cutscene, I see no reason why it would be different.

[Dean_the_Young]

afarkas1 wrote...



If it weren't dangerous, why would the Normandy be running away from it?

The fear it could be dangerous.

We know the effect isn't fatal because the Normandy survives it, as does the Earth in any high-asset.

[Militarized]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Militarized wrote...

You cannot have intergalactic travel with the FTLs in Mass Effect, it's stated at the very beginning of Mass Effect 1. No relays = no travel except for VERY, VERY close systems that are next to yours.

No, it isn't.

You can't have the scale or speed of Mass Relay travel with FTL, but the barrier for 'slow' FTL is logistics, not capacity.

Shepard flies across entire nebulas in matters of days.

Yes it is. Nihilus says it right in the beginning, to set the precedent of how important the Relays are to the galaxy. It's not a matter of "logistics" the entire concept of FTL is a magnetic charge that they have to release over a specific type of planets surface(yes I know ingame its represented as fuel but it's just a game mechanic). The galaxy has vast swathes of -emptiness- where the drive core would build up and kill everyone inside. 

All the ships are built like that, sorry, they'd have to completely redesign their ships for any hope to travel. Depending on your point of view all mass effect tech is destroyed in every ending... which is why Jokers ship crashes in EVERY ending. The second bit I write is subjective but the first one isn't. 

[FOX216BC]

 Big explosions in the galaxy seen from afar in all endings.
Start from 01:34  

[Bobrzy]

Endings make everyone confused and FORCE us to assume things, instead of explaining everything how it's done.

/thread

[Tank207]

Because we're told and shown in Arrival that a Mass Relay explosion is powerful enough to destroy entire star systems.

Modifié par Tank207, 01 avril 2012 - 03:49 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Militarized wrote...

Yes it is. Nihilus says it right in the beginning, to set the precedent of how important the Relays are to the galaxy. It's not a matter of "logistics" the entire concept of FTL is a magnetic charge that they have to release over a specific type of planets surface(yes I know ingame its represented as fuel but it's just a game mechanic). The galaxy has vast swathes of -emptiness- where the drive core would build up and kill everyone inside.

That is a logistics issue, and it can be handled with better exploration and technology.

All the ships are built like that, sorry, they'd have to completely redesign their ships for any hope to travel. Depending on your point of view all mass effect tech is destroyed in every ending... which is why Jokers ship crashes in EVERY ending. The second bit I write is subjective but the first one isn't. 

If all Mass Effect tech is destroyed in every ending, every ending would destroy the Reapers or at least leave them laying on Earth. That's clearly false.

The reason the Normandy crashed was that it got violently dragged out of FTL. We see other ships not in FTL continue their ability to function when the wave hits them.

[Archereon]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

afarkas1 wrote...



If it weren't dangerous, why would the Normandy be running away from it?

The fear it could be dangerous.

We know the effect isn't fatal because the Normandy survives it, as does the Earth in any high-asset.

The Earth only survives in Control, see my most recent post in this thread to see why.

[Orthodox Infidel]

NGC1300 wrote...

mikeaj1024 wrote...

The problem isnt confined to the destruction they may have caused. Its that the relays network was vital to the galaxy. The current societies do not have the ability to rebuild the relay network, and without it they are trapped in whatever cluster they currently reside.

but don't they have FTL engines? two of the endings you got reapers on your side. With destroy ending you still have probably millions of capable quarians/turians/humans. Even for the worst case, you cose destroy and decimated the quarians, weren't humans and turians enough to recreate FTL engines? Since from my understandings, even turians got the best fleets in the galaxy?

They do have FTL engines, but the effectiveness and implications of having FTL engines is unclear.

For instance, even at FTL speeds, it's going to take a long time for people to get back home. Nobody's sure how long exactly. The best guess we have for FTL speeds came from an offhand comment by Ashley in ME1 which suggested that trips of 12 light years a day were "common." At that speed, you could cross the entire width of the galaxy in a little less than 30 years. The only ones who have to travel anywhere close to that far are the Quarians and Geth; everyone else's home planet is a lot closer to Earth.

People usually respond to this with "there's no gas, they don't have enough food for the trip, and they need to discharge their drive cores somewhere." Fuel problems are hard to figure out, since most of the infrastructure around FTL trips got smashed to tiny pieces by the Reapers. I think the food problem is vastly over-estimated, considering that cryonics is commonplace in this universe, it should be possible to put most people on ice for the whole trip, cutting down the food budget significantly. Also, Quarians have been growing food in space for the last 3 centuries and they didn't all starve to death. Finally, if they really can fly around the galaxy at 12 ly/day, they'll be able to visit plenty of star systems full of stuff to discharge against, especially considering most of them are headed coreward.

Then again, everything I just said is built on a whole bunch of assumptions that might not hold up if other assumptions (such as the relays blew up everything) are true. So yeah, writing fail.

[NGC1300]

I see some people still don't understand what I proposed lol. but anyway, plz keep this thread off rubbish memes, rants, whines, etc. plz. I'd like to gather some thoughts.

Productive thoughts.

[afarkas1]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

afarkas1 wrote...



If it weren't dangerous, why would the Normandy be running away from it?

The fear it could be dangerous.

We know the effect isn't fatal because the Normandy survives it, as does the Earth in any high-asset.

See my edit. the ship is very clearly damaged by the blast,  and it gets hit just as the explosion appears to be winding down. What about planets and structures that couldn't run away at FTL speeds?

It could be that they are all fine, but once again, they dont give enough information to know either way, because virtually nothing is explained.

[Yeslew]

You can make any theory you want, if you do a theoryception (theory inside a theory inside a theory... and goes on ) you can explain every single flaw that the end shows you, but you cannot affirm it 100%, it is up to you believe or not that the relays were destroyed, or that you can travel the galaxy without them (i don't believe it because if it takes too much time it's not worth it).

[Samuel_Valkyrie]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Eyeshield21 wrote...

Samuel_Valkyrie wrote...

In Arrival, it wasn't just the destruction with an asteroid that the loe said would blow up the entire starsystem, it's the destruction of a Mass Relay. Anytime a Mass Relay is destroyed, so Arrival indicated, it would result in a catastrophic event.

Furthermore, destroying the Mass Relay Network is bringing about a new Dark Age...exactly what we tried to prevent. So, why did we play this game again?

This.

Not this, because it was the relay but the energy inside the relay that caused estruction. If the energy inside the relay is used, then it won't have an Arrival effect.

Nor was Shepard's story about preventing a new Dark Age, it was about preventing the total genophage of space-faring species.

1: After that total genocide of space-faring species, new spacefaring species would come up, and a new galactic society would rise....so, yeah, a Dark Age for space-faring species.

2: I'm sorry, but it's the energy inside, that explodes and therefore would not create the total destruction? That doesn't make sense at all. 

In Arrival, the energy contained in the Mass Relay, when disrupted through, say, kinetic impact, would destroy a solar system. Now, extra energy is put into a Mass Relay. So much, that it cannot hold all this energy. Now, you claim that this extra energy somehow reduces the explosion?

[cachx]

NGC1300 wrote...

so why people are so certain that it must kill everything?

Because it's easier for people that hate the endings to assume that, rather than consider the alternatives.

[Militarized]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


That is a logistics issue, and it can be handled with better exploration and technology.

If all Mass Effect tech is destroyed in every ending, every ending would destroy the Reapers or at least leave them laying on Earth. That's clearly false.

The reason the Normandy crashed was that it got violently dragged out of FTL. We see other ships not in FTL continue their ability to function when the wave hits them.

No.. it isn't a logistics issue, it is a design issue, one that most likely cannot be overcome without some major breakthroughs in tech. There is no way for you to wrangle/wiggle out of it, everyone is cut off from everyone else unless Bioware retcons their lore AGAIN. 

The ONLY ships you see it effect at the beginning are the Reapers, the Reapers seem unharmed but Alliance ship the Normandy has only it's Mass Effect engines destroyed. The possibility is that it effects Reapers differently, it's specifically stated in the storyboard that EVERY ending = a new galactic dark age which means a loss of technology/learning. It's pretty clear their narrative intent was to push a big reset button for everyone, starting at simpler times to avoid their weaksauce tech singularity theory that makes no sense anyway. 

[mjboldy]

Archereon wrote...

Plus, it's quite possible the destroyed Citadel, which, based on the conduit's orientation, the fact that it's in London, and the fact the geosynchronous orbits are only possible over the equator means it's suspended over Earth with mass effect fields in an artificially sustained orbit, meaning it could hit Earth at wll over 10km/s. While it wouldn't be on the same scale as the impact that killed the dinosaurs (about 1/1000th of the yield), it still would have the kinetic energy of 20,000 Tsar Bombas combined.

This impact would turn the seas to acid, darken the skies, and tuen the air to poison. Doomsday stuff.

What he said. I remember learning this stuff back in 3rd grade. 

[DiE231]

OhoniX wrote...

Because some people just really don't like the ending already, so they then take every little thing they can find and blow it to the most ridiculous levels they can, so that in their heads the ending is even worse, to justify their little emo rants about how the ending is horrible and needs to be changed.

If they looked at the situation objectively, there's no way they could believe that the relays were blowing up everything. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

Uh, that's the whole point of it, it is safe to assume that the relays aren't blowing up everything, as you said, that wouldn't make sense(nothing makes sense in the ending, but whatever).

However, lorewise, we know for sure that a mass relay explosion releases enough energy to destroy an entire system.


This just shows how much thought BW put into the ending.

Modifié par DiE231, 01 avril 2012 - 03:57 .

[Barict78]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Militarized wrote...

You cannot have intergalactic travel with the FTLs in Mass Effect, it's stated at the very beginning of Mass Effect 1. No relays = no travel except for VERY, VERY close systems that are next to yours.

No, it isn't.

You can't have the scale or speed of Mass Relay travel with FTL, but the barrier for 'slow' FTL is logistics, not capacity.

Shepard flies across entire nebulas in matters of days.

Actually look it up online it would take HUNDREDS of years at FTL to get from earth to the nearest Star. Oh and if u like the end great but it is a broken story and broken ending. Dont believe me? Actually watch this:  
And then tell me what u Honestly think of the end of ME3 but u must actually WATCH the whole thing not just blindly defend the ending