261 réponses à ce sujet

[NGC1300]

Zardoc wrote...

NGC1300 wrote...

Veggiesofmanycolors wrote...

NGC1300 wrote...

are you people seriously asking for scientific explanation from a game that you can do FTL, throw biotics, joining consensus with robots, etc.. now?

you serious people? and then call it bad writings right away?

BSN is getting more BS, I see.

All of those are explained actually.

The ships are not actually going faster than light or even light speed.  They're using element zero to reduce the mass of space around them in order to seem like they're going the speed of light when in reality they're not.

The Biotics create power by doing the exact opposite, increasing mass of dark energy.

and how is that even more scientific? plz clarify. because it has codex, now it's scientific?

last time I checked, you asked about how the beam turn everyone into cyborgs, not whethere it';s consistent with the plots, etc.

It isn't.

missed the point.

[NM_Che56]

Zardoc wrote...

NGC1300 wrote...

are you people seriously asking for scientific explanation from a game that you can do FTL, throw biotics, joining consensus with robots, etc.. now?

you serious people? and then call it bad writings right away?

BSN is getting more BS, I see.

You do realise that all those things you mentioned are properly explained within the game itself and a great deal of it (FTL for instance) is experimental physics/science. Hence the term SCIENCE fiction.

Whereas a guy jumping into a beam of light causing synthetics to suddenly get DNA and organics suddenly becoming cyborgish is neither explained nor can it be properly explained. That, my friend, is FANTASY in space, also known as space magic.

How does the geth affect quarian's ability to resist infection?  science FICTION

[mikx82]

Space Enchantment! XP

[NM_Che56]

Veggiesofmanycolors wrote...

I was actually just asking how it made any sense. There is no explanation to it period scientific or otherwise.

If taken literally as presented, you are correct.

[Fruit of the Doom]

We just want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

Modifié par Fruit of the Doom, 09 avril 2012 - 04:19 .

[Jamie9]

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

[razor150]

Master Che wrote...

Delta-62 wrote...

Pretty much all sci-fi is based on bad science (FTL being impossible, an elemant with no atomic mass? THE HELL!?) we know this and we accpet it, but this BS science needs to be presented in a way that that it is believeable. Star child... was not.

My point is that it's all space magic.  So to say it at every turn only in reference to star brat is implying that everything else is well founded in science.

There is a thing called suspension of disbelief, you should look it up. Once the space brat shows up it asks the viewer, at this point we are viewers since we lose control of Shepard, to jump off a cliff with it. A writer should know how far they can go before their audience can no longer suspend disbelief.

[NM_Che56]

Fruit of the Doom wrote...


We want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

The use of the term Space Magic to pick on this one part of the fiction is a bit hypocritical when one accepts other aspects of the fiction that is not consistent with reality.  Why? Because the critique of Space Magic is levied because of it's inconsistency with reality (i.e., how is that possible?).  It would be best to use another term.

[NM_Che56]

razor150 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Delta-62 wrote...

Pretty much all sci-fi is based on bad science (FTL being impossible, an elemant with no atomic mass? THE HELL!?) we know this and we accpet it, but this BS science needs to be presented in a way that that it is believeable. Star child... was not.

My point is that it's all space magic.  So to say it at every turn only in reference to star brat is implying that everything else is well founded in science.

There is a thing called suspension of disbelief, you should look it up. Once the space brat shows up it asks the viewer, at this point we are viewers since we lose control of Shepard, to jump off a cliff with it. A writer should know how far they can go before their audience can no longer suspend disbelief.

I do not need to look up what I already know.  I didn't pick Synthesis.  So I did not jump off a cliff.

[NGC1300]

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...


We want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

The use of the term Space Magic to pick on this one part of the fiction is a bit hypocritical when one accepts other aspects of the fiction that is not consistent with reality.  Why? Because the critique of Space Magic is levied because of it's inconsistency with reality (i.e., how is that possible?).  It would be best to use another term.

precisely.

[NM_Che56]

Jamie9 wrote...

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

So one piece of BS sounds better than the other because of mumbo jumbo and eezo (a made up thing)? LOL

[Fruit of the Doom]

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...


We want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

The use of the term Space Magic to pick on this one part of the fiction is a bit hypocritical when one accepts other aspects of the fiction that is not consistent with reality.  Why? Because the critique of Space Magic is levied because of it's inconsistency with reality (i.e., how is that possible?).  It would be best to use another term.

Stop putting words in our mouths, unless you are really that ignorant of why we hate this absurdity.

Space magic is specifically referring to the totally unexplained "magical" properties of Spacebrat.  If it had some sort of explanation, we would probably still say it was ridiculous.  But as is, it is unexplained and totally absurd.

Hence, magic.

[Fruit of the Doom]

Master Che wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

So one piece of BS sounds better than the other because of mumbo jumbo and eezo (a made up thing)? LOL

Yes, because telekinesis and altering the DNA of every life form in the galaxy are totally equivalent.

[Veggiesofmanycolors]

Mass Effect is a space opera, not hard-science fiction. It doesn't need to have every plot element grounded by what has already been established in science.

What I am asking for is just any explanation period as to how the synthesis thing happens. It's not just that it doesn't make sense, it's that there is no explanation at all.

[NM_Che56]

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...


We want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

The use of the term Space Magic to pick on this one part of the fiction is a bit hypocritical when one accepts other aspects of the fiction that is not consistent with reality.  Why? Because the critique of Space Magic is levied because of it's inconsistency with reality (i.e., how is that possible?).  It would be best to use another term.

Stop putting words in our mouths, unless you are really that ignorant of why we hate this absurdity.

Space magic is specifically referring to the totally unexplained "magical" properties of Spacebrat.  If it had some sort of explanation, we would probably still say it was ridiculous.  But as is, it is unexplained and totally absurd.

Hence, magic.

I didn't.  I'm just paraphrasing what you're saying.

What makes space brats magic any less acceptable than all the rest of the space magic hurrled at us?  Objectively speaking, of course?

FYI: I find that people tend to get emotional, defensive and use inflamatory language when they cannot articulate themselves in a clear and concise manner or explain why they believe or do certain things.

[Aetas Mutuo]

They had a last minute visitor in the writing room when they were working on the ending.



Crazy space magic...

Modifié par Aetas Mutuo, 09 avril 2012 - 04:28 .

[NM_Che56]

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

So one piece of BS sounds better than the other because of mumbo jumbo and eezo (a made up thing)? LOL

Yes, because telekinesis and altering the DNA of every life form in the galaxy are totally equivalent.

Santa Claus or Easter Bunny.  Which one is more believable? LOL

[NM_Che56]

Veggiesofmanycolors wrote...

Mass Effect is a space opera, not hard-science fiction. It doesn't need to have every plot element grounded by what has already been established in science.

What I am asking for is just any explanation period as to how the synthesis thing happens. It's not just that it doesn't make sense, it's that there is no explanation at all.

You have to listen to what space brat tells you about it and then strip away the euphamistic language.  Go back to ME2 and listen to EDI and Mordin talk about the Collectors.  With that in mind, synthesis sounds horrific!

[Laurencio]

Dockerr wrote...

Part of the problem here is not that it's unrealistic. FTL flight, sexy aliens speaking english and laser guns are all unrealistic. The problem is internal consistency.

Think about this: if the reapers have the sort of technology to rewrite all life in the galaxy at a genetic level, regardless of origin or chemical composition, and change it to their whims, then why are they still bothering with lasers and spaceships? If they have the level of technology to do that (indistinguishable from magic) why do they still bother flying in big scary squid ships?

Just activate the citadel and reduce all the sentient lifeforms to drolling vegetables, then go and clean up as usual. Or merge everyone's DNA with that of a bit of cheese, and then melt everyone with a big microwave.

The reapers being a (beatable) military threat cannot coincide with them having this sort of capability.

That would end their current function. Reaping has no purpose without organics who are, or will be capeable ofproducing intelligent synthetics, to reap. If they did that then they would end their purpose and make themselves redundant.

You speak of reapers as if they were a mighty civilization, but they aren't. Their function, their purpose, is in their name. They exist to reap to avoid chaos between synthetics and organics. That is what we are told.

Modifié par Laurencio, 09 avril 2012 - 04:32 .

[Fruit of the Doom]

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

So one piece of BS sounds better than the other because of mumbo jumbo and eezo (a made up thing)? LOL

Yes, because telekinesis and altering the DNA of every life form in the galaxy are totally equivalent.

Santa Claus or Easter Bunny.  Which one is more believable? LOL

Countering an accusation of false equivalency with a falsely equivalent analogy?  LOL

[NM_Che56]

I honestly am stunned that someone tried to argue the merits of telekinesis! WOW!

[Fruit of the Doom]

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...


We want internal consistency.

It wouldn't be science fiction if it were consistent with reality.

The use of the term Space Magic to pick on this one part of the fiction is a bit hypocritical when one accepts other aspects of the fiction that is not consistent with reality.  Why? Because the critique of Space Magic is levied because of it's inconsistency with reality (i.e., how is that possible?).  It would be best to use another term.

Stop putting words in our mouths, unless you are really that ignorant of why we hate this absurdity.

Space magic is specifically referring to the totally unexplained "magical" properties of Spacebrat.  If it had some sort of explanation, we would probably still say it was ridiculous.  But as is, it is unexplained and totally absurd.

Hence, magic.

I didn't.  I'm just paraphrasing what you're saying.

What makes space brats magic any less acceptable than all the rest of the space magic hurrled at us?  Objectively speaking, of course?

FYI: I find that people tend to get emotional, defensive and use inflamatory language when they cannot articulate themselves in a clear and concise manner or explain why they believe or do certain things.

You are not paraphrasing.  You are oversimplifying what people are saying and ignoring what they actually said.

Either because you are a troll, or you lack the cognitive ability to understand their real point.

[Velocithon]

Master Che wrote...

ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL

As if the endings weren't bad and confusing enough, they have to do this and make Shepard look like a husk. Which only creates like 100 more questions that are never answered.

[NM_Che56]

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Fruit of the Doom wrote...

Master Che wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

There is a difference between biotics (which are glossed over with a codex entry that at least tries to explain it with science mumbo jumbo and eezo) and synthetics having DNA. One you can look past, one makes you question everything that has to do with it.

So one piece of BS sounds better than the other because of mumbo jumbo and eezo (a made up thing)? LOL

Yes, because telekinesis and altering the DNA of every life form in the galaxy are totally equivalent.

Santa Claus or Easter Bunny.  Which one is more believable? LOL

Countering an accusation of false equivalency with a falsely equivalent analogy?  LOL

So you picked Santa Claus...


They're both fictional beings.  Ergo, there is a degree of equivlance.  To argue the merits of one over the other is equally absurd.


Hopefully this didn't spoil anyone's holidays.