223 réponses à ce sujet

[OhoniX]

Sorry, that's not how you phrased it. it wouldn't affect eezo directly, but without the relays it's much harder to get your hands on.

Not exactly true. Getting new Eezo would be less convenient, certainly, but there would be plenty of spare refined Eezo in Earth orbit now due to the combined fleets that blew themselves ti bits in orbit, and apparently it's a fairly stable resource, you don't consume it like gasoline, it's more like nuclear fuel, a little bit will do you for a long time, so all the ships that still run probably have plenty to last them as long as they need it to.

[legaldinho]

Barict78 wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Fliprot wrote...

Because they told us so in the DLC they made based totally around that premise.

They told us if we destroyed the relay with an asteroid impact it would go nova... and we saw it, it did.

Here something else- supposedly something to do with the tech that created the relays and the citadel - is causing them to break. And we don't see a nova. You can say "well, that is a bit abrupt for fans who follow cannon- coudn't you explain?" but you can't say "well it goes nova dur everyone dies". That takes something extraneous to the ending. You're supplying that extra information yourself.

Any thing that any of us say id Conjecture at this point the end does not Define anything and the 1st most logical assumption one would make given the information we were presented up to that point is that if the relays blow the solar system goes. To assume otherwise is conjecture and By YOU and is you supplying the extra info YOUR self cuz what we were told up to this point is that A=B or more simply relay blows = Solar System Goes. So to come to ANY conclusion other than that is YOU Supplying The Xtra facts at the end

I'm not assuming anything. In Arrival DLC I saw the nova explosion after asteroid impact. If the ending had shown an asteroid, planetary, ship or any other kind of blunt impact and no nova, I would have been dismayed.

No, it showed a beam coming from the crucible, going into the relay, causing it to disseminate it and then break up. NO NOVA.

Rather than assume the nova is a stupid ommission, I simply take it in and modify the canonical precepts about mass relay destruction.

You compare like with like. It is you who's fixed in your beliefs and fundamentally refuses to accept what was before your eyes. There is a way to destroy the relays, and it doesn't go nova.

The source of this information is the same source as that which led you to think that destruction of relays mean death of the star system: the videogame itself.

Modifié par legaldinho, 01 avril 2012 - 04:37 .

[Vhalkyrie]

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay destroys the star system.

This is based on Arrival DLC.

Vhalkyrie shoulda wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay with an asteroid impact destroys the star system. Using the technology which created the relays, this can be done without destroying the star system.

This is based on what happens in the game. Arrival DLC happens in the game. The ending does too. Ergo, canon has been enriched, and generalised, absolute statements like yours no longer apply. The key difference is in Arrival we see the Nova explosion, and in the endings we don't. We just see the relay break up.

Strawman argument with no basis.  Reread the quote I was highlighting.

Don't tell me what I should have written.  Especially in the context of it being abjectly false.

[Wolven_Soul]

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?

We are going by previously established lore here.  We have nothing to contradict that lore in the game.  What else are we supposed to believe?

[Barict78]

OhoniX wrote...

all this is moot anyways cuz all technology is usless anyways do you really think a ship would continue to be space worthy after its Core exploded? if it can then why does the Normandy crash at all? Why doesnt the wave hit it damage it and then they just FTL jump to where they want to go?

Nothing destroyed any Eezo cores. The relays were destroyed, not the cores on individual ships, not any Eezo anywhere. All the Eezo is fine. The Normandy crashed because it was in mid-relay transit when one of the relay beams hit ti from behind, which was an enormous wave of energy. This would obviously have a catastrophic effect on the ship and knocked it out of relay transit, but it didn't cause the Eezo core to spontaneously explode. We don't know what the state of the Normandy's drive systems are in the end, but clearly the ship has crashed. Whether it could even be made spaceworthy again is an open question, although the safe money would be that it's toast without outside help.

That makes no sense at all if the goal of the End is to wipe out all reaper influence so as to start "Fresh" then Yes Element Zero Every WHere would be Destroyed Becuz it is the very BASIS of Reaper Tech and the path the reapers want us to Develop Technologically

[legaldinho]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay destroys the star system.

This is based on Arrival DLC.

Vhalkyrie shoulda wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay with an asteroid impact destroys the star system. Using the technology which created the relays, this can be done without destroying the star system.

This is based on what happens in the game. Arrival DLC happens in the game. The ending does too. Ergo, canon has been enriched, and generalised, absolute statements like yours no longer apply. The key difference is in Arrival we see the Nova explosion, and in the endings we don't. We just see the relay break up.

Strawman argument with no basis.  Reread the quote I was highlighting.

Don't tell me what I should have written.  Especially in the context of it being abjectly false.

I was presenting you with a modified canonical statement. The source of the modification is the same as the original: the videogame itself. The pertinent question is: why do you refuse to modify the canonical belief?

[Wolven_Soul]

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?

Well, since were having this discussion, I am of the mind that every ship present in the sol system was destroyed by the pulse.  You see, we see Normandy running away from it, the pulse causes it to crash on some remote planet.  Normandy is the fastest ship in the galaxy.  How are those other ships supposed to have gotten away in time from that pulse?

[satunnainen]

Joker was certainly outrunning some wave, but not sure what was it. On the other hand frying your ships computers during a ftl-flight might not be too healthy so better run away I guess.

About the galaxy map "explosions", if you know how big the galaxy actually is and you can estimate from the video how fast those bubbles were expanding, they were much faster than lightspeed, so they couldnt be any conventional explosion...

[Barict78]

Wolven_Soul 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?

We are going by previously established lore here.  We have nothing to contradict that lore in the game.  What else are we supposed to believe?

Exactly and to do so is Conjecture on the part of the person sayin they didnt take out the Solar Systems cuz up till SpaceBrat we are led to believe that is the only result from a Destroyed Relay. They dont say " well 6 out of 10 times it blows up the Solar System" or "it MIGHT decimate the Solar System not sure Lets Find Out!"

[Ariq]

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?
 

We don't know for sure, because the game is unclear on this point. What we have is narrative foreshadowing: ME3 begins with Shepard under investigation for the destruction of the Bahak system. In Arrival, we were shown that a Relay being destroyed released energy on the scale of a supernova. The Codex repeats this idea. The destruction fo a Relay, in canon, results in the destruction of the system. No contradictory evidence is presented. We do know for certain that the destruction of the Charon Relay is destructive -- it damages the Normandy as the Joker flees the system. It is not a benign or harmless energy release.

Can we speculate that Bioware didn't intend this? Well, people can speculate most anything. but there is no textual reason to believe this, nothing we are told or shown indicates that this incident is different than the foreshadowing incident of the Alpha Relay in Arrival. A single line of dialogue from the Starkid would have been sufficient to set aside the question. It doesn't happen. The only contradictory evidence is external to the game, the belief and assumption that Bioware did not or could not have intended this ending to be so final.
 
At best, it is a gaping plothole, and we only say different because of meta-analysis by fans who don't believe Bioware intended to destroy the entire known galaxy. At worst, most of the explored galaxy is destroyed, including the homeworlds of most of the characters and races we've loved from Mass Effect. By the by, the Stargazer scene doesn't offer support for either interpretation: we know some populated worlds exist in systems lacking Relays. A single colony that survives in a "Galactic Dark Age" is sufficient to give Stargazer a place to exist.

[OhoniX]

What difference does it make if it was an asteroid or the beam? An asteroid is not going to make the destruction of a relay any bigger. It can only affect the surrounding area. It is the force or energy of the relay that causes the devestation of the system, not the asteroid.

The beam traveling from relay to relay was carrying the instructions and energy from the crucible to that it could transmit your instructions to every point in the galaxy in an organized fashion. This massive release of energy caused the relays to break down, destroying them, but AFTER all of their energy had been spent, so there would be nowhere for them to go. It's essentially the difference between driving your car so hard and so fast that by the time the gas is spent the engine seizes up, compared to throwing a lighter into the gas tank. One will be a lot more impressive than the other.

Seriously compare the two videos on youtube, in Arrival, the asteroid crushes the relay, which causes its energy field, with nowhere to go and nothing containing it, to go out of control. In the Me3 ending, on the other hand, the energy of the relay is blasted out to the next relay, while the relay itself just sort of crumbles apart. There is no giant supernova explosion, just a "demolition" explosion that would only be of concern if you were right on top of it (or in the transit beam at the time).

right, because clearly those bright R/G/B Explosions stretching over the entire Galaxy are something completely different from the Explosion in Arrival and are completely harmless.

Yes, exactly so. The energy waves released in ME3 were not "explosions", they were traveling WAY too fast for that, they were merely "transformative waves", carrying the Crucible code to every point in the Galaxy.

Modifié par OhoniX, 01 avril 2012 - 04:43 .

[Vhalkyrie]

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay destroys the star system.

This is based on Arrival DLC.

Vhalkyrie shoulda wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay with an asteroid impact destroys the star system. Using the technology which created the relays, this can be done without destroying the star system.

This is based on what happens in the game. Arrival DLC happens in the game. The ending does too. Ergo, canon has been enriched, and generalised, absolute statements like yours no longer apply. The key difference is in Arrival we see the Nova explosion, and in the endings we don't. We just see the relay break up.

Strawman argument with no basis.  Reread the quote I was highlighting.

Don't tell me what I should have written.  Especially in the context of it being abjectly false.

I was presenting you with a modified canonical statement. The source of the modification is the same as the original: the videogame itself. The pertinent question is: why do you refuse to modify the canonical belief?

The canonical statement is that the destruction of a mass relay destroys the star system.  This is established in Arrival as canon.  Saying the difference is that an asteroid causes a supernova, but the crucible doesn't is strawman.  There is no established explanation for why this happens.  Except fanfic or space magic to cover up a plot hole.

Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 01 avril 2012 - 04:44 .

[Wolven_Soul]

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.

Oh you must be right because we do not have any in game lore to back up what we're saying.  Oh...wait...we do...

[Barict78]

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay destroys the star system.

This is based on Arrival DLC.

Vhalkyrie shoulda wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay with an asteroid impact destroys the star system. Using the technology which created the relays, this can be done without destroying the star system.

This is based on what happens in the game. Arrival DLC happens in the game. The ending does too. Ergo, canon has been enriched, and generalised, absolute statements like yours no longer apply. The key difference is in Arrival we see the Nova explosion, and in the endings we don't. We just see the relay break up.

Strawman argument with no basis.  Reread the quote I was highlighting.

Don't tell me what I should have written.  Especially in the context of it being abjectly false.

I was presenting you with a modified canonical statement. The source of the modification is the same as the original: the videogame itself. The pertinent question is: why do you refuse to modify the canonical belief?

Where pray tell in any of the Video Games do you Glean this wonderful tidbit of Lore? Up till SpaceBaby we are led to believe that it is an Absolute Fact that a Relays Destruction Decimates the SOlar System. So where in game does it say otherwise? or are u just Speculating and adding ur own FEELINGs and Thought to the end? WHich is fine if u are cuz thats what the ends make one have to do but at least admit it.

[legaldinho]

Tleining wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

They told us if we destroyed the relay with an asteroid impact it would go nova... and we saw it, it did.

Here something else- supposedly something to do with the tech that created the relays and the citadel - is causing them to break. And we don't see a nova. You can say "well, that is a bit abrupt for fans who follow cannon- coudn't you explain?" but you can't say "well it goes nova dur everyone dies". That takes something extraneous to the ending. You're supplying that extra information yourself.

right, because clearly those bright R/G/B Explosions stretching over the entire Galaxy are something completely different from the Explosion in Arrival and are completely harmless.

Must have played a different game

Well they're plainly different. In arrival an asteroid bluntly impacts on the relay. You see the impact and THEN AFTERWARDS you see a nova explosion. In the RGB ending a ray pulses through the relay, then cause sthe relay to break up. We're forewarned of this by the abominable godchild.

The question you should be asking is: why is the difference material? You say it's not, but that is based on what exactly? it's based on what you see in Arrival. Well based on what I see in ME3, I say it is a material difference. A ray from a technological device that is of the same order (has the same origin) as the mass relays may well use them one last time and then disable them.

Could the exposition have been better? Sure. I'm firmly in the endings are a botched camp. But I don't think the argument about the relays destroying the systems holds. It's overkill by fans so disappointed at the ending they are clutching at straws in order to criticise it. There are many, and valid, other criticisms to be made about the ending.

[Babyberry]

The major issue here is that we don't have enough information to go on:

1. The mass relay destruction in the endings could be different from the one in The Arrival DLC- this is hard to argue for or against simply since we don't have enough information. It's obvious that Bioware intended us to think they're just gone, but I have a hard time ignoring the DLC information. No one in this universe even understands how Mass Relays work anyways because they never took the time to try and build one themselves. They just seem to know they work and that's that.

2. FTL drives may enough to get people back to their home planets- regardless of all the details we know about FTL drives and what it takes to use them, if all the stars align and ships start home and manage to find enough fuel and other resources to make the trips home, then it takes 20+ years. I still think it's very unlikely that everyone will be lucky enough to be successful in this endeavor, but I can accept that some will make it home.

There is still the issue of resources in home systems though. As far as I remember, all of the home planets are reliant on colonies for supplies. Am I misremembering? Also, colonies are reliant on the home worlds for technology and the like. So even with FTL travel being a (somewhat) possible way to travel, the time it would take to get necessary supplies to and from all the different colonies and home planets negate the delicate balance that existed when the Mass Relays were still up.

I think it comes down to the entire galaxy is pretty screwed with the Mass Relays gone. A lot of people will die just trying to make it to some sort of inhabitable planet, and even more still while they adjust to the new galaxy. Which makes the ending even worse because we weren't told anything to let us know that this is even a viable outcome.

BSG did an ending similar to this, with a galactic dark age starting life anew, and even though I wasn't 100% sold on that ending, it still did it better.

Modifié par Babyberry, 01 avril 2012 - 04:49 .

[Wolven_Soul]

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.

Only becaues they managed to crash land on a planet.  If they had not gotten to it in time, I am pretty sure they would all be dead.  The Normandy looked pretty darn totaled there at the end.

[legaldinho]

Barict78 wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay destroys the star system.

This is based on Arrival DLC.

Vhalkyrie shoulda wrote...
Blowing up a mass relay with an asteroid impact destroys the star system. Using the technology which created the relays, this can be done without destroying the star system.

This is based on what happens in the game. Arrival DLC happens in the game. The ending does too. Ergo, canon has been enriched, and generalised, absolute statements like yours no longer apply. The key difference is in Arrival we see the Nova explosion, and in the endings we don't. We just see the relay break up.

Strawman argument with no basis.  Reread the quote I was highlighting.

Don't tell me what I should have written.  Especially in the context of it being abjectly false.

I was presenting you with a modified canonical statement. The source of the modification is the same as the original: the videogame itself. The pertinent question is: why do you refuse to modify the canonical belief?

Where pray tell in any of the Video Games do you Glean this wonderful tidbit of Lore? Up till SpaceBaby we are led to believe that it is an Absolute Fact that a Relays Destruction Decimates the SOlar System. So where in game does it say otherwise? or are u just Speculating and adding ur own FEELINGs and Thought to the end? WHich is fine if u are cuz thats what the ends make one have to do but at least admit it.

You need to understand the distinction between "the ending modifies canonical beliefs at the last minute and without proper and adequate exposition" and " the endings are not canonical". Bear in mind, of course, that only about 10% of the players might have played arrival. I certainly didn't: i had to youtube the missions.

[RenownedRyan]

Did you play Arrival?

[Bleachrude]

I think the difference is that

"is destruction caused by an outside force the same thing as SELF-destruction"

Personally, I can see it going either way but Arrival doesn't actually answer the latter it should be noted.

[OhoniX]

That makes no sense at all if the goal of the End is to wipe out all reaper influence so as to start "Fresh" then Yes Element Zero Every WHere would be Destroyed Becuz it is the very BASIS of Reaper Tech and the path the reapers want us to Develop Technologically

You're just making things up now. There is no evidence whatsoever for this. There was nothing in the game to "wipe out all reaper influence so as to start "Fresh," all that any of the endings did was remove the Reapers themselves from the equation. Any technology they used is still around, except for the relays, which were destroyed as a side effect of spreading the command signals across the galaxy.

Oh you must be right because we do not have any in game lore to back up what we're saying. Oh...wait...we do...

No, you don't. You have game lore covering a different situation and you're trying to insist that it applies equally to this situation. Different situations, different outcomes. You can't take a case study of one and then insist that all other cases must play out exactly the same, even when the circumstances are different.

[Spectre Impersonator]

It still destroys everything, because everyone stuck in the Sol system will soon be at war and starve to death, tearing the galactic alliance apart.

[Canned Bullets]

rma2110 wrote...

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

[Tleining]

legaldinho wrote...


Well they're plainly different. In arrival an asteroid bluntly impacts on the relay. You see the impact and THEN AFTERWARDS you see a nova explosion. In the RGB ending a ray pulses through the relay, then cause sthe relay to break up. We're forewarned of this by the abominable godchild.

whoa! Stop right there. Let's slowly recap, okay?
Beam from the Citadel/Crucible is send out towards the Relay. Check!
Relay-Rings speed up, send a beam of Energy towards the next Relay(s). Check!
Relay break up. Check!
Switch to Galaxy Map: We see the beam of Energy from one Relay going to the Next. Check!
After the Beam is send out, we see a Circular Explosion, emanating from the Relay Positions. Check!

Now where does it say that these Explosions are harmelss?

The question you should be asking is: why is the difference material? You say it's not, but that is based on what exactly? it's based on what you see in Arrival. Well based on what I see in ME3, I say it is a material difference. A ray from a technological device that is of the same order (has the same origin) as the mass relays may well use them one last time and then disable them.

It's based on the Fact that no one told us differently? You can imagine that it is different because the beam is send out by Starchild....., but that is Fanfiction. I like Fanfiction. But it's not canon. It's not backed up by the ingame Codex or technobabble.

Could the exposition have been better? Sure. I'm firmly in the endings are a botched camp. But I don't think the argument about the relays destroying the systems holds. It's overkill by fans so disappointed at the ending they are clutching at straws in order to criticise it. There are many, and valid, other criticisms to be made about the ending.

It IS a pessimistic View, yes. But the Alternative, to me at least, would be that the Fleets would be trapped in the Sol-System, and there just isn't enough food for everyone. So quick death by Relay-Explosion, or slow Starvation on devastated Earth. Take your Pick.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Species can't survive on their own in Mass Effect. Imagine being stranded on one planet for the rest of your life, for centuries.

Now I'd really hate that.

Modifié par Fisto The Sexbot, 01 avril 2012 - 04:55 .