223 réponses à ce sujet

[ahleung]

The destruction of a Mass Relay being so destructive is not due to the energy caused by an asteroid impact, but due to the energy originally held by the Mass Relay. That's what I remember, or so said the ME wiki
http://masseffect.wi...wiki/Mass_Relay

So, what caused a Mass Relay destruction is not important.
As long as it is destroyed, releasing the energy it holds, it's catastrophic.

RGB beams might be harmless. But they destroyed the Mass Relays. It's the Mass Relay destruction itself being harmful.

Modifié par ahleung, 01 avril 2012 - 05:00 .

[Barict78]

legaldinho wrote...

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.

The Fact Remains that It is Conjecture at this point. I didnt play Arrival Either but it does Exsist and it was released by BioWare so what it contains then becomes Canon. so if the canon up till now states as a fact that the destruction of Relay=Destruction of SolarSystem and we are given NO facts to support another argument other than "Becuz i think it so it must be" then u are the one creating things and adding things to the end NOT the people that believe them to be destroyed cuz that is the only logical solution one can come to with the information presented to us. Just Becuz the Explosions are Different than the Arrival Explosions it isnt a fact that they arent destroyed no that is whats called Conjecture No 2 Explosions are the same at all nor should they be so the argument of "Well the Explosions looked less harmful so they MUST be alive"  is an argument based in Conjecture not fact the facts we have been presented implicitly states the opposite that the destruction of a realy takes out the corrisponding Solar System that is the Facts we were Given at no point in any of the Games does it state or give an example of a Magical different kind of explosion leaving the Solar System unharmed tho this may have been BioWares goal it was not Stated that this is the case anywhere so to say that it is the case is basing an argument on what u think not what the Facts are.

[Barict78]

ahleung wrote...

The destruction of a Mass Relay being so destructive is not due to the energy caused by an asteroid impact, but due to the energy originally held by the Mass Relay. That's what I remember, or so said the ME wiki
http://masseffect.wi...wiki/Mass_Relay

So, what caused a Mass Relay destruction is not important.
As long as it is destroyed, releasing the energy it holds, it's catastrophic.

Finally someone who can put it into words they may actually understand. Thank You.

[CavScout]

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.

They want to justify their hatred of the endings.

[DJBare]

The asteroid was nothing but the firing pin, good grief, the energy released by a destroyed mass relay would make an asteroid look like a party popper.

[Wolven_Soul]

legaldinho wrote...

TekMage wrote...

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.

Because it is accepted as canon, in Arrival DLC, that destroying a Mass Relay also destroys the system in which it resides. Since there is nothing to disprove this fact in the case of the ending, then we safely assume that the original theory stands as true.

In the case that the designers believed that the RGB explosions are somehow different, then they should have taken the time to explain this in the course of the main plot and not leave it to our imagination, which would naturally be led to believe the original assumption in the Arrival DLC.

The first part of your post is misguided: it's accepted as "canon" that an asteroid impact will cause the relay to go nova. And it is shown in arrival dlc to be the case. Well now the canon has to make clear that certain other kinds of destructions- presumably limited to those using the tech that created the mass relays in the first place- do not cause the same nova explosion.

Only the second part of your criticism- that exposition was woefully short in introducing hardcore followers of ME canon to a refined idea of the destruction of the relays- holds true. 

I really wish I knew where you people were getting the idea that the method of destruction of a mass relay has anything to do with what happens once the relay is gone.  It is not the asteroid that causes that devesation, it is the mass relay being destroyed.  It doesn't matter how it is destroyed.

If I have a bomb, pushing the detonator button lightly is not going to make the explosion any less than if I smack the button with a hammer.

[legaldinho]

Tleining wrote...

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.

You're deciding what's fan fiction, you see: I could just as well say that the general statement that "all destructions, no matter what the source, of mass relays cause the relay to go nova" is fan fiction. It's based on fans rejecting what they see in the ending: that a beam from the crucible can break up the relays without causing the white flash slow supernova we saw in Arrival. This is rejectionism, because it chooses certain bits of the game and calls them canon- and rejects others and calls them out for failing to adhere to this interpretation of canon.

@ the poster who went through the steps to remind me that the galaxy map type scene in the ending shows explosions. I had assumed, and I think it's a natural assumption, that this was the crucible energy being beamed, rather than a nova. I think if you go back and watch the ending of arrival and compare it with the endings, it's very different. First the whiteflash, then the nova explosion. On the galaxy map, everything seems to disintegrate.

www.youtube.com/watch

At 2:45 ish, the impact can be seen.

At 2.50 ish, the nova builds up. It explodes outright at 2:55.

Shepard sees it on his galaxy map at 3:00. It's distinguishable from the ending's RGB explosions, imo, but interpretations will differ. The key is that we see the nova; we don't in the ending.

[Wolven_Soul]

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.

We have nothing in game to explain to us why the destruction of the relays in the ending would be any less than that of the Arrival DLC.  Just...seeing that it does not happen does not explain a danged thing. 

[Barict78]

OhoniX wrote...

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.

dude ur just delusional the game clearly states the release of the energies stored in a mass relay if not shunted into the act of traveling will destroy the Solar Syatem it resides in it is a game FACT not some made up flowery ending that u wanna draw from this just cuz the explosions LOOK different does not mean that the SAME Energies were not released  from the relay i mena ok lets say ur right and it blows up and somehow doesnt take out the system where the Frak did all that energy go? heaven? SpaceBrats Cereal?no it has to go somewhere so it goes outward and a relay is a hugely pwerful thing and also huge in size so if it goes up in ANY TYPE of EXPLOSION the energy HAS to be released somewhere I E the Solar sytem its in and that would decimate the planets of said solar sytem if they wanted the System to have lived it would have been really easy they COULD have had the Pulse just render ALL relays Inert but no they BLEW THEM UP... so this is what we have

[DJBare]

CavScout wrote...

They want to justify their hatred of the endings.

Or people are just willing to gloss over that the only cannon we got was Arrival, there is not even anything in the codex relating to different ways relays can be destroyed, it is essentially contrived.

[sinatron]

Barict78 wrote...

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

Ehm... this post makes no sense at all. No where is stated eezo will be removed and considering your own posts are against conjecture, please refrain from it yourself.
I'm sure Reaper tech is also based on more common materials and organic life. You don't see these being entirely removed from the Galaxy either.
Just because Reapers use tech that require eezo to work, doesn't mean *they* invented eezo.
Reaper tech also required organic influence, most likely.
Reaper tech also required various metals.

The "path" Reapers wanted "us" to follow was to take the Citadel as a government seat and use Mass Relays to travel so they can shut off galactic travel and pick out a system one by one without a giant galactic force building up that *might* counter them.

Modifié par sinatron, 01 avril 2012 - 05:08 .

[NGC1300]

Wolven_Soul wrote...

legaldinho wrote...

TekMage wrote...

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.

Because it is accepted as canon, in Arrival DLC, that destroying a Mass Relay also destroys the system in which it resides. Since there is nothing to disprove this fact in the case of the ending, then we safely assume that the original theory stands as true.

In the case that the designers believed that the RGB explosions are somehow different, then they should have taken the time to explain this in the course of the main plot and not leave it to our imagination, which would naturally be led to believe the original assumption in the Arrival DLC.

The first part of your post is misguided: it's accepted as "canon" that an asteroid impact will cause the relay to go nova. And it is shown in arrival dlc to be the case. Well now the canon has to make clear that certain other kinds of destructions- presumably limited to those using the tech that created the mass relays in the first place- do not cause the same nova explosion.

Only the second part of your criticism- that exposition was woefully short in introducing hardcore followers of ME canon to a refined idea of the destruction of the relays- holds true. 

I really wish I knew where you people were getting the idea that the method of destruction of a mass relay has anything to do with what happens once the relay is gone.  It is not the asteroid that causes that devesation, it is the mass relay being destroyed.  It doesn't matter how it is destroyed.

If I have a bomb, pushing the detonator button lightly is not going to make the explosion any less than if I smack the button with a hammer.

let me clarify this as I saw some people don't quite get the idea. I'm
not saying what hitting the relays matters, all I'm saying is, the relay
in Arrival got blatantly hit by an asteroid while the relays in the
endings were tampered by the
energy of the crucible. It opens the possibities for certain assumptions
like the energy from the crucible might negate the destruction force or
it might simply be something else and not "explosion" or the energy
from the crucible changes the energy released from the relays into some
other harmless forms of energy, etc.. that's what I was talking about.

[Sinnerj117]

Even if they were destroyed differently, the outcome would still be the same. That built up energy has to go somewhere. In truth, the entire ending didn't make sense.

<_<

Modifié par Sinnerj117, 01 avril 2012 - 05:13 .

[Wolven_Soul]

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?

Except it is not up to you, or to us to modify the canon.  It is not our story.  We can only on what we have already learned.  If we are supposed to believe that the crucible beam does not cause the relays to super nova, that is fine, but that needs to be explained in the game. 

[NGC1300]

Sinnerj117 wrote...

You clearly haven't played the Mass Effect 2 Arrival DLC.

<_<

And you clearly just read the title and replied right away.

[thehomeworld]

Because arrival shows that's what happens, but in reality they just blow up they don't take the solar system with them why?

Because the eezo cores get ejected prior to them blowing up it creates a pinball effect relay 1 ejects the eezo core to relay 2 that one ejects these two cores onward to relay 3 and so forth. The dud relays then explode and break into pieces.

If the eezo core wasn't ejected prior to destruction then yes the relay would go nova.

[Sinnerj117]

NGC1300 wrote...

Sinnerj117 wrote...

You clearly haven't played the Mass Effect 2 Arrival DLC.

<_<

And you clearly just read the title and replied right away.

April fools, n00b! I'm just messing around. I edited my post. Take a look again if you wish.

Modifié par Sinnerj117, 01 avril 2012 - 05:14 .

[KingNothing125]

Because we saw a relay destroyed in ME2, and it wiped out an entire star system. It's only following simple logic.

If BioWare wanted to blow up the mass relays in ME3 and NOT have us believe that we committed galaxy-cide this time, they should have explained it better.

Modifié par KingNothing125, 01 avril 2012 - 05:23 .

[TemplePhoenix]

1. Blowin' up a relay blows up the system it's in.

2. The many alien species who designed the Crucible would probably have known this too.

3. Logically, they would make sure the Crucible did not blow the relays up the 'usual' way.

The problem we all have is that there is nothing to confirm this ingame other than the fairly vague ending movie. What we should have had is:

CATALYST: This will destroy the relay network.
SHEPARD: Whoa! Won't that kill all of us anyway?
CATALYST: Not in this case, BECAUSE...

...yet another thing missing from the ending, I guess. Probably on the same disc as the explanation for Joker's retreat.

[Evil Minion]

We saw the mass relays for a split second.

I saw a burst of colored light followed by what appeared to be the relays "disintegrating." We also saw a "colored wave."

What was the "colored wave?" We don't know. Did the relays actually blow up? We don't know.

Speculate all you want based on three second of footage, but it's still just speculation. And they obviously didn't destroy everything. Civilization continues to exist very far into the future.

They all just live like Amish people (?).

[legaldinho]

ahleung wrote...



The destruction of a Mass Relay being so
destructive is not due to the energy caused by an asteroid impact, but
due to the energy originally held by the Mass Relay. That's what I
remember, or so said the ME wiki

http://masseffect.wi...wiki/Mass_Relay



So, what caused a Mass Relay destruction is not important.

As long as it is destroyed, releasing the energy it holds, it's catastrophic.



RGB beams might be harmless. But they destroyed the Mass Relays. It's the Mass Relay destruction itself being harmful.

DJBare wrote...

The asteroid was nothing but
the firing pin, good grief, the energy released by a destroyed mass
relay would make an asteroid look like a party popper.

Wolven_Soul wrote...

I really wish I knew where you people were getting the idea that the method of destruction of a mass relay has anything to do with what happens once the relay is gone.  It is not the asteroid that causes that devesation, it is the mass relay being destroyed.  It doesn't matter how it is destroyed.

If I have a bomb, pushing the detonator button lightly is not going to make the explosion any less than if I smack the button with a hammer.

You're all sayin the same thing, essentially. I'm not saying the asteroid causes the nova. I'm saying based on what we've seen, a blunt impact causes the relays to break up, and in that case this causes the relay to go nova.

In the case of the crucible, we see a beam going through the relays, then causing them to break up. We don't see the nova. We've been told by the abominable godchild that releasing the energy will cause the relays to break up, and some other consequences will follow depending on its colour. The natural assumption is that life will go on (no matter how hard, and potentially disastrous: for the Sol system's visitors in particular). Given that the game- the same game that told you of this piece of canon you hold so dear- told you that, why strain to say "well the ending means all life is extinguished in solar systems housing a relay because of the nova?"

You're supplying your own interpretation here, and calling it canon. In a sea of criticisms of the ending, most of which are valid, this is the last stretch of water I'd sail my boat on.

But people are clearly very upset. I'm now arguing witn loads of people at the same time, so I apologise if I can't keep track of all of them.

[lasertank]

Lots of speculations!!!

[NGC1300]

Sinnerj117 wrote...

NGC1300 wrote...

Sinnerj117 wrote...

You clearly haven't played the Mass Effect 2 Arrival DLC.

<_<

And you clearly just read the title and replied right away.

April fools, n00b! I'm just messing around. I edited my post take a look again if you wish.

whatever.

[satunnainen]

Destroyed in a way that breaks the relay so that the energy gets released or destroyed in a way that breaks the relay so that you will need some serious maintenance and possibly spare parts to fix it. That is the main question I think. I also think there are more than one way to break a relay, just like any technical device.

[DJBare]

NGC1300 wrote... It opens the possibities for certain assumptions
like the energy from the crucible might negate the destruction force or
it might simply be something else and not "explosion" or the energy
from the crucible changes the energy released from the relays into some
other harmless forms of energy, etc.. that's what I was talking about.

So it's contrived, you used the words "assumption", "something else", "might", this is bad story telling, remember, the only information the player got about the destruction of a mass relay is from Arrival, so from that the player does not have to make "assumptions"; it's what we are "told" is the result of destroying a mass relay.