282 réponses à ce sujet

[Provo_101]

Balek-Vriege wrote...

If you watch both videos one after the other or better yet all the endings and the arrival video, you will see the explosions are very different...

Not to mention those arguing against the supernova theory are actually using all the games scenes and codex entires to come to a logical deduction.  Those thinking there were supernovas are actually ignoring a lot of setup lore, even what happens in arrival, to prove a supernova happened.  I don't know about you, but if the Galactic "explosions" were supernovas covering the whole Galaxy... there wouldn't be a galaxy left period.  Arrival doesn't support a supernova spanning multiple systems ever.

WHAT!? You got that backwards, mate. Ignoring "setup lore"? Arrival counts as "setup lore" in terms of what happens when a damn Relay explodes. There is no other precedent in which we've seen a Relay simple "overload" No one ever said that Relay supernovas encompass multiple systems at once, but there are dozens of relays throughout the galaxy, there is clearly a chain reaction throughout the Relay Network at the end, most homeworlds and trading hubs are located in the same system as a Mass Relay as well.

Believe me, I don't want there to be supernovas that destroy every system in Galactic Civilization as much as the next guy, but there is no other evidence (visible or otherwise) that leads to the contrary. 

On that note, Joker's silly Gilligan's Planet is a plothole regardless of how you spin it, in more ways than one. So don't use that a piece of evidence.

Also, Mass Effect has gotten really shoddy with retcons since Mass Effect 2. The fact is that Mass Effect 3's endings are plot-hole riddled even when you try and reach a logical deduction for it. I'd really like to know how a Relay can survive being hit by the blast of an exploding star, but another gets destroyed by an asteroid. (the Mu Relay, and the Alpha Relay, respectively, in case you forgot)

Please, give me examples of "all the games scenes and codex entries" that give you a logical deduction stating otherwise. 

[Funkdrspot]

sistersafetypin wrote...

The Citadel isn't the Normandy and the arms aren't escape pods.

You obviously don't quite understand action/reaction. If the explosion occurs at the rings, the reaction is that the arms are pushed off, however slight. I'm not saying they'll shoot out, but they won't be traveling in the opposite direction of the explosion.

sistersafetypin wrote...
If the there is enough force for the arms to break off, then it stands that the force would also cause them to further breakdown.

That's a huge assumption. The ring is about as weak a link in the citadel system as it gets. It looks almost flimsy by comparison to the arms. How you came about your conclusion is beyond me

sistersafetypin wrote... And considering how close the Citadel was to Earth's orbit, it stands to reason that at least a few of those objects fell into Earth's atmosphere.

We don't know how close the citadel is to earth. We KNOW it's not in the atmosphere. It looks to be well out of orbit. Far enough away anything that objects would likely orbit it rather than crash to earth unless on a direct trajectory.

sistersafetypin wrote...Why, did I make that logic step? Because an object in motion remains in motion unless stopped by an equal or greater force. There is no such force in the area of Space the Citadel occupied.

You quoted a law of physics but then you have no idea of the vector.....lol please never quote a physics law again.

Modifié par Funkdrspot, 01 mai 2012 - 09:02 .

[Iconoclaste]

There is nothing against what this "explosion" could "push", and the Citadel's mass must be far above what is needed to sustain "push" from an explosion (in the void?)

The shockwave from the blast must have just shaked the structure, dislocating the arms. The arms were not "pushed" by pressure (in the void?) from the explosion.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 01 mai 2012 - 04:25 .

[Funkdrspot]

Iconoclaste wrote...

There is nothing against what this "explosion" could "push", and the Citadel's mass must be far above what is needed to sustain "push" from an explosion (in the void?)

lol lordy more pseudo science.

The explosion itself is the push, in space. What is a rocket but a controlled explosion?

And you don't need anything to sustain a push in space since there is no friction.

Iconoclaste wrote...
The shockwave from the blast must have just shaked the structure, dislocating the arms. The arms were not "pushed" by pressure (in the void?) from the explosion.

A shockwave is pressure. 0/10 on your physics test.

[Funkdrspot]

Provo_101 wrote...

Balek-Vriege wrote...

If you watch both videos one after the other or better yet all the endings and the arrival video, you will see the explosions are very different...

Not to mention those arguing against the supernova theory are actually using all the games scenes and codex entires to come to a logical deduction.  Those thinking there were supernovas are actually ignoring a lot of setup lore, even what happens in arrival, to prove a supernova happened.  I don't know about you, but if the Galactic "explosions" were supernovas covering the whole Galaxy... there wouldn't be a galaxy left period.  Arrival doesn't support a supernova spanning multiple systems ever.

WHAT!? You got that backwards, mate. Ignoring "setup lore"? Arrival counts as "setup lore" in terms of what happens when a damn Relay explodes. There is no other precedent in which we've seen a Relay simple "overload" No one ever said that Relay supernovas encompass multiple systems at once, but there are dozens of relays throughout the galaxy, there is clearly a chain reaction throughout the Relay Network at the end, most homeworlds and trading hubs are located in the same system as a Mass Relay as well.

Believe me, I don't want there to be supernovas that destroy every system in Galactic Civilization as much as the next guy, but there is no other evidence (visible or otherwise) that leads to the contrary. 

On that note, Joker's silly Gilligan's Planet is a plothole regardless of how you spin it, in more ways than one. So don't use that a piece of evidence.

Also, Mass Effect has gotten really shoddy with retcons since Mass Effect 2. The fact is that Mass Effect 3's endings are plot-hole riddled even when you try and reach a logical deduction for it. I'd really like to know how a Relay can survive being hit by the blast of an exploding star, but another gets destroyed by an asteroid. (the Mu Relay, and the Alpha Relay, respectively, in case you forgot)

Please, give me examples of "all the games scenes and codex entries" that give you a logical deduction stating otherwise. 

This is quite honestly, the weak link in the counter argument. It always comes down to

"But the codex sez...."
"But Arrival....."
"But we have no precendent...."

which basically says if the game makers don't spell it out for you in black and white you can't see that

a) the codex does not have contengencies for things it knows nothing about.
 Arrival is nothing like the crucible and it's so sad that it even has to be mentioned
c) Reference A. How do we set a precedent for something that has NEVER happened yet? Quite simply you don't.

[vixvicco]

Nah I think the Starbrat actually mentioned that the mass relays would be destroyed.

[Iconoclaste]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

There is nothing against what this "explosion" could "push", and the Citadel's mass must be far above what is needed to sustain "push" from an explosion (in the void?)

lol lordy more pseudo science.

The explosion itself is the push, in space. What is a rocket but a controlled explosion?

And you don't need anything to sustain a push in space since there is no friction.

Iconoclaste wrote...
The shockwave from the blast must have just shaked the structure, dislocating the arms. The arms were not "pushed" by pressure (in the void?) from the explosion.

A shockwave is pressure. 0/10 on your physics test.

Everybody can read. This explosion happens between the crucible and the platform, and expanses radially from there, for the most part. Its growing speed is not stopped by air, and if it did not eject the crucible, it surely did not push the arms away. Shockwave through the structure is more probably the cause of the arms' dislocation than the tiny pressure at the end of the fireball growth.

http://www.wwheaton..../mad/mad12.html

[Iconoclaste]

Funkdrspot wrote...

You obviously don't quite understand action/reaction. If the explosion occurs at the rings, the reaction is that the arms are pushed off, however slight. I'm not saying they'll shoot out, but they won't be traveling in the direction of the explosion.

Explain the nature of this explosion, if you can. Maybe the NASA could use your knowledge.

[EnvyTB075]

Funkdrspot wrote...

This is quite honestly, the weak link in the counter argument. It always comes down to

"But the codex sez...."
"But Arrival....."
"But we have no precendent...."

which basically says if the game makers don't spell it out for you in black and white you can't see that

Lets make it as simple as simple can be.

>Play Arrival, Relay explodes, destroys star system.
>Reaction: "Wow, destroying a relay causes a huge explosion!
____________________________________________________

>Watch ending cinematic, see the relays explode, then sees galaxy map and explosions eminating from each relay
>Reaction: "Holy s***, all the relays were destroyed, that means all the star systems are gone too!"

Arrival sets the standard of which we are to react to a relay explosion with or without the codex entries. The ending cinematics imply that this occurs with the explosions of light as the beams spread forth into the relay network. Why would somone think otherwise? What evidence is there to imply that the relays didn't explode like in Arrival in the ending cinematics?

None.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 01 mai 2012 - 07:02 .

[Funkdrspot]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

There is nothing against what this "explosion" could "push", and the Citadel's mass must be far above what is needed to sustain "push" from an explosion (in the void?)

lol lordy more pseudo science.

The explosion itself is the push, in space. What is a rocket but a controlled explosion?

And you don't need anything to sustain a push in space since there is no friction.

Iconoclaste wrote...
The shockwave from the blast must have just shaked the structure, dislocating the arms. The arms were not "pushed" by pressure (in the void?) from the explosion.

A shockwave is pressure. 0/10 on your physics test.

Everybody can read. This explosion happens between the crucible and the platform, and expanses radially from there, for the most part. Its growing speed is not stopped by air,

LoL just stop dood.
A. An explosion is CAUSED by a mix of fuel and air.
B. There is no atmosphere in outer space.
C. If anything, an explosion in outer space will be SMALLER due to A and B.

Iconoclaste wrote...and if it did not eject the crucible, it surely did not push the arms away.

Rofl. As you said, the blast came from the center and expanded radially. That blast itself will push those arms away from eachother, radially. What does an explosion do but push you back?!
For the rest, just reference Newton's 3rd law of motion

Iconoclaste wrote...
Shockwave through the structure is more probably the cause of the arms' dislocation than the tiny pressure at the end of the fireball growth.

http://www.wwheaton..../mad/mad12.html

A shockwave is energy. It is force. It eminates from the center of the blast. It is literally force being applied to push the citadel arms away from the center.

Seriously dood, stop talking physics. It's embarrassing. Go take a class and come back.

[daecath]

Oh, "overload", that's much better. So instead of exploding because of physical damage, releasing the normal amount of energy it contains in an uncontrolled burst, it explodes because even MORE energy is pumped into it. Yeah, I can see why that would be much better.

Someone take the shovels away from them before they hit China.

[daecath]

Funkdrspot wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...

There is nothing against what this "explosion" could "push", and the Citadel's mass must be far above what is needed to sustain "push" from an explosion (in the void?)

lol lordy more pseudo science.

The explosion itself is the push, in space. What is a rocket but a controlled explosion?

And you don't need anything to sustain a push in space since there is no friction.

Iconoclaste wrote...
The shockwave from the blast must have just shaked the structure, dislocating the arms. The arms were not "pushed" by pressure (in the void?) from the explosion.

A shockwave is pressure. 0/10 on your physics test.

Everybody can read. This explosion happens between the crucible and the platform, and expanses radially from there, for the most part. Its growing speed is not stopped by air,

LoL just stop dood.
A. An explosion is CAUSED by a mix of fuel and air.
B. There is no atmosphere in outer space.
C. If anything, an explosion in outer space will be SMALLER due to A and B.

Iconoclaste wrote...and if it did not eject the crucible, it surely did not push the arms away.

Rofl. As you said, the blast came from the center and expanded radially. That blast itself will push those arms away from eachother, radially. What does an explosion do but push you back?!
For the rest, just reference Newton's 3rd law of motion

Iconoclaste wrote...
Shockwave through the structure is more probably the cause of the arms' dislocation than the tiny pressure at the end of the fireball growth.

http://www.wwheaton..../mad/mad12.html

A shockwave is energy. It is force. It eminates from the center of the blast. It is literally force being applied to push the citadel arms away from the center.

Seriously dood, stop talking physics. It's embarrassing. Go take a class and come back.

Said the pot to the kettle.
explosion
noun:
a. A release of mechanical, chemical, or
nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation
of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.
b. A violent bursting as a result of internal pressure.
c. The loud, sharp sound made as a result of either of these actions.
"fuel + air" is only one method of generating an explosion. Popping a balloon is also an explosion. Splitting an atom is an explosion. A massive release of stored dark energy is an explosion.

Modifié par daecath, 01 mai 2012 - 08:37 .

[Funkdrspot]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

This is quite honestly, the weak link in the counter argument. It always comes down to

"But the codex sez...."
"But Arrival....."
"But we have no precendent...."

which basically says if the game makers don't spell it out for you in black and white you can't see that

Lets make it as simple as simple can be.

>Play Arrival, Relay explodes, destroys star system.
>Reaction: "Wow, destroying a relay causes a huge explosion!
____________________________________________________

>Watch ending cinematic, see the relays explode, then sees galaxy map and explosions eminating from each relay
>Reaction: "Holy s***, all the relays were destroyed, that means all the star systems are gone too!"

Only if you're too dim to understand that they are completely different scenarios with the only correlation being that the relay is gone.

EnvyTB075 wrote...Arrival sets the standard of which we are to react to a relay explosion with or without the codex entries.

False. That is a fallacy of hasty generalization. Arrival sets the standard WHEN SLAMMING A KINETIC OBJECT TO A RELAY. Nothing more.

It's circular logic to suggest that the ending couldn't possibly be the relays NOT going into nova, providing the alpha relay as proof of this, but then when people counter with the variables between the two, you point back to the alpha relay as proof.

EnvyTB075 wrote...The ending cinematics imply that this occurs with the explosions of light as the beams spread forth into the relay network.

Lord how do you guys graduate highschool with this level of perception and comprehension?! Do they teach you what variables are?!

The ending cinematic shows you a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT set of events than Arrival so how could they be the same event?!

1. Alpha relay gets hit with a rock, goes nova, takes out the system. end.
2. In the end, the crucible + citadel ( CATALYST ) has the relays releasing EM fields to the whole cluster, then daisy chain the energy to the next relay.

Take away the relays being used up in the process and how are they even remotely similar? They're not. Not even close.

EnvyTB075 wrote...Why would somone think otherwise? What evidence is there to imply that the relays didn't explode like in Arrival in the ending cinematics?

None.

The ending cinematics itself. If they wanted to show you that the relays were going nova, they would have done so. If the EM field was meant to cause a nova, they would have shown it happening to earth, since the Crucible + Citadel did start the process and the Citadel IS a relay.

[GuardianAngel470]

I don't know, are they?

[Funkdrspot]

daecath wrote...


Said the pot to the kettle.
explosion
noun:
a. A release of mechanical, chemical, or
nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation
of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.
b. A violent bursting as a result of internal pressure.
c. The loud, sharp sound made as a result of either of these actions.
"fuel + air" is only one method of generating an explosion. Popping a balloon is also an explosion. Splitting an atom is an explosion. A massive release of stored dark energy is an explosion.

You're talking gibberish and adding nothing to the convo. What explosion are you even arguing, or did you feel like debating the semantics of what an explosion is?

Modifié par Funkdrspot, 01 mai 2012 - 08:56 .

[PsyrenY]

arial wrote...

people think they went Supernova because of what happened in Arrival. but that relay did not go super-nova simply because it was destroyed, but because of the conditions in which it was destroyed.

but dont try and tell this to the anti-end people, they are continuously looking for plot-holes where there are none.

Agreed on all counts.

[PsyrenY]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

>Reaction: "Wow, crashing an asteroid full of explosives into a relay causes a huge explosion!

Fixed that for you

[Funkdrspot]

daecath wrote...

Oh, "overload", that's much better. So instead of exploding because of physical damage, releasing the normal amount of energy it contains in an uncontrolled burst, it explodes because even MORE energy is pumped into it. Yeah, I can see why that would be much better.

Someone take the shovels away from them before they hit China.

Seriously, a lot of you guys think you're much smarter than you really are. Think about the variables between the two.

1. Uncontrolled explosion.
- Takes out a system with a supernova.
- only 1 relay

2. Controlled EM release.
- Converts energy to EM field that covers the whole cluster, which is many many systems
- Energy passes between relays as they overload/release
- Effect daisy chains through all relays, carrying a sustained release of EM



If for nothing else, the fact that the EM field covers vastly more area and that a huge chunk of energy is seen shooting off to the next relay seems to indicate that this is far more controlled than the alpha.

[daecath]

The relays store massive amounts of energy. The Arrival DLC shows what happens when the container unit for that energy is suddenly and violently breached. Namely, massive amounts of energy are released all at once in an uncontrolled explosion.

The ending shows what happens when more energy than the container can handle is pumped into it. This one is tricky. It shows an uncontrolled release of energy too, but it also shows a controlled release - namely the beam that shoots from relay to relay.

Here's the problem. The relay system is a contained system, meaning that there is a set amount of energy within it. More energy (from the crucible/catalyst/citadel/whatever) is pumped into it. Now, maybe a relay is able to bleed off enough of it's energy plus the excess energy from the crucible to not go nova. However, that means that even more energy is sent to the next relay, and the next gets even more, and so on. Eventually, you're going to reach a point where there are no more relays, and all that excess energy has to go somewhere. Since there's no where to shoot it to, one of two things is going to occur. Either it will be released in a semi-controlled beam the same as the rest, but one that is fired in a random direction. I would suggest not being in front of such a beam at the time, since all the excess energy that was bled off from the relays that didn't go supernova would be in there. Or, it's going to have nowhere to go, so it's going to explode in a release of energy even worse than Arrival, since it has all the excess from all the rest of the relays. In any case, there's a high probability that someone's day has just been ruined. Maybe not the entire galaxy, but more than likely at least a star system or two.

[daecath]

Funkdrspot wrote...

daecath wrote...


Said the pot to the kettle.
explosion
noun:
a. A release of mechanical, chemical, or
nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation
of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.
b. A violent bursting as a result of internal pressure.
c. The loud, sharp sound made as a result of either of these actions.
"fuel + air" is only one method of generating an explosion. Popping a balloon is also an explosion. Splitting an atom is an explosion. A massive release of stored dark energy is an explosion.

You're talking gibberish and adding nothing to the convo. What explosion are you even arguing, or did you feel like debating the semantics of what an explosion is?

Funkdrspot wrote...
A. An explosion is CAUSED by a mix of fuel and air.
B. There is no atmosphere in outer space.
C. If anything, an explosion in outer space will be SMALLER due to A and B.

I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your argument. Explosions are not necessarily caused by a mix of fuel and air, and the lack of atmosphere will not have any impact on the size of an explosion that is not caused by a chemical reaction requiring oxygen.

[Grudge_NL]

Oh god really ? Anti Enders logic.  "Every Relay explosion must be causing mass destruction in a galaxy"

Let's compare the 2 different relay explosions.

The Mass Relay explosion in the DLC:
www.youtube.com/watch  at 0:51

Look at how an astroid completely interrupts the Mass Relay, smashing into it's blue core. This causes a giant explosion, as the Relay's core is still intact and charged. Obviously this will end up in a big explosion, as all of the unstable energy is exposed.

Now let's look at ME3.

www.youtube.com/watch  Start looking from 0:10 towards 0:21

Did you notice the difference ? Now let's use logic and common sense.

The Rings surrounding the Relay's core start to spin at a immense speed, suggesting a massive power consumption. At 0:21, all of the core's energy is used by shooting the citadel's beam into space, hence the immense speed of the spinning rings.  In other words, a controlled explosion. 

The remaining power in the Mass Relay is close to none, thus the explosion won't destroy an entire galaxy.

Modifié par Grudge_NL, 01 mai 2012 - 09:09 .

[Funkdrspot]

Iconoclaste wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

You obviously don't quite understand action/reaction. If the explosion occurs at the rings, the reaction is that the arms are pushed off, however slight. I'm not saying they'll shoot out, but they won't be traveling in the direction of the explosion.

Explain the nature of this explosion, if you can. Maybe the NASA could use your knowledge.

Think of the Citadel like a big flower. If i put a firecracker in the middle of it, the force from the explosion will be a straight vector that will push them away from the center of the flower.

I guess I could draw a diagram if you guys want but this isn't NASA stuff, this is simple applied physics. NASA stuff is finding the weight of an astronaut 4km from earth's surface. Most people think that when you leave orbit that you leave earth's gravitational pull. Or that weight = mass.

[PsyrenY]

daecath wrote...

Here's the problem. The relay system is a contained system, meaning that there is a set amount of energy within it. More energy (from the crucible/catalyst/citadel/whatever) is pumped into it. Now, maybe a relay is able to bleed off enough of it's energy plus the excess energy from the crucible to not go nova. However, that means that even more energy is sent to the next relay, and the next gets even more, and so on.

For this assumption to work, you need to make the assertion that "all of a relay's energy is sent to the next relay in the network." There is no support for this in-game.

For instance, prior to shooting out its core, we see the Sol Relay's bands accelerate to spin at blinding RPM. This consumes energy, and is something that the Arrival relay does not do.

[Funkdrspot]

daecath wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

daecath wrote...


Said the pot to the kettle.
explosion
noun:
a. A release of mechanical, chemical, or
nuclear energy in a sudden and often violent manner with the generation
of high temperature and usually with the release of gases.
b. A violent bursting as a result of internal pressure.
c. The loud, sharp sound made as a result of either of these actions.
"fuel + air" is only one method of generating an explosion. Popping a balloon is also an explosion. Splitting an atom is an explosion. A massive release of stored dark energy is an explosion.

You're talking gibberish and adding nothing to the convo. What explosion are you even arguing, or did you feel like debating the semantics of what an explosion is?

Funkdrspot wrote...
A. An explosion is CAUSED by a mix of fuel and air.
B. There is no atmosphere in outer space.
C. If anything, an explosion in outer space will be SMALLER due to A and B.

I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your argument. Explosions are not necessarily caused by a mix of fuel and air, and the lack of atmosphere will not have any impact on the size of an explosion that is not caused by a chemical reaction requiring oxygen.

You posting all the dictionary defintions of what an explosion CAN mean doesn't mean they have application in this context.

If a FIREBALL is the byproduct of an explosion, then it is consuming o2 or H for that explosion which we clearly see for the citadel.

Nothing i said was flawed, but maybe you didn't understand the context since you jumped in the convo.

Modifié par Funkdrspot, 01 mai 2012 - 09:17 .

[Muhkida]

It's a pity Bioware didn't give us enough detail on the original ending. Topics like this wouldn't exist otherwise.

Here's hoping the EC ending DLC fixes this.