231 réponses à ce sujet

[TheCrimsonSpire]

Fixers0 wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...
and like I told you, I don't know if Squee really was being condescending, because to me he wasn't. Squee is a really calm, generous individual. I know, because we have met personally. We cannot obviously predict exactly the intentions of both parties, in true detail, but what we do know, is the things which were said in the videos themselves. In them, Squee was not trying to antagonize Smudboy, just trying to prove him wrong. The same cannot be said for Smud however. Smud openly mocked Squee in his videos, so you tell me who the better person was in the end.

At least Smudboy sticked to the facts.

That's not an acceptable justification for being an as$hole, just sayin.

[Fixers0]

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...
and like I told you, I don't know if Squee really was being condescending, because to me he wasn't. Squee is a really calm, generous individual. I know, because we have met personally. We cannot obviously predict exactly the intentions of both parties, in true detail, but what we do know, is the things which were said in the videos themselves. In them, Squee was not trying to antagonize Smudboy, just trying to prove him wrong. The same cannot be said for Smud however. Smud openly mocked Squee in his videos, so you tell me who the better person was in the end.

At least Smudboy sticked to the facts.

That's not an acceptable justification for being an as$hole, just sayin.

But it is acceptable if you want to bite so-called loyal fans off you, without using stupid excuses.

[Funkdrspot]

Fixers0 wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...
and like I told you, I don't know if Squee really was being condescending, because to me he wasn't. Squee is a really calm, generous individual. I know, because we have met personally. We cannot obviously predict exactly the intentions of both parties, in true detail, but what we do know, is the things which were said in the videos themselves. In them, Squee was not trying to antagonize Smudboy, just trying to prove him wrong. The same cannot be said for Smud however. Smud openly mocked Squee in his videos, so you tell me who the better person was in the end.

At least Smudboy sticked to the facts.

An interpretation of the facts is not itself a fact, it's an opinion.

[TheCrimsonSpire]

Fixers0 wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...
and like I told you, I don't know if Squee really was being condescending, because to me he wasn't. Squee is a really calm, generous individual. I know, because we have met personally. We cannot obviously predict exactly the intentions of both parties, in true detail, but what we do know, is the things which were said in the videos themselves. In them, Squee was not trying to antagonize Smudboy, just trying to prove him wrong. The same cannot be said for Smud however. Smud openly mocked Squee in his videos, so you tell me who the better person was in the end.

At least Smudboy sticked to the facts.

That's not an acceptable justification for being an as$hole, just sayin.

But it is acceptable if you want to bite so-called loyal fans off you, without using stupid excuses.

No, then you fail as a debator the moment you drop yourself to petty insults, in order to end/win an argument. Don't ever try to justify when it is acceptable to be rude or jerkish. It shouldn't even be an option during the argument.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Xeranx wrote...

Also, LOTSB didn't say that unmanned probes didn't work.  The probes were recovered.  We never learned what was on those probes, if anything, so it's a guess to assume that they didn't work.  Why did he make this point?  Because everyone stated that no one made it back if they used the Omega 4 relay.  So in order for the probes to be recovered, they would have had to come back through the relay for the remains to be picked up.

Still, that didn't really work as a counter-argument. So much as we (and everyone else know) the Omega-4 relay was impenetrable by any ship, hence why the idea of TIM needing to explain that he sent probes through is really pointless. From a story perspective, what makes probes so different from ships that they would return?

In the Shadowbroker's case, yes, he got backa  wreckage. But ME2 did establish that the IFF's purpose was that it allowed more precise mass relay jumps, which prevented the very significant risk of landing outside the safe zone. That the Shadowbroker got any probes back at all was essentially a one in a million shot and not really an effective premise for why TIM should think the plan will tell him anything.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 04 juin 2012 - 06:11 .

[Evenjelith]

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

TheCrimsonSpire wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

IF the base of the Citadel lighting up ISN'T the Conduit, then what is it? Why would Anderson assert to Shepard that it IS a Conduit? IF it isn't the Conduit, then how does the Conduit transport you to the Citadel? After all, there aren't teleporters in ME.

The conduit on the ground, is obviously a Relay of some type, seeing as how that technology is available to the Reapers. Therefore, the relay could take you aboard the Citadel, without the need of a visual connection, such as a beam of light. The assertion made by Smudboy, is that there is a constant switch between the beam on, then off in every other shot. This is an invalid claim, because there never was an establishing beam shot to begin with from the Citadel, like Smudboy claims.   

Not necessarily true. Just because you don't explicitly see it doesn't mean it isn't there or couldn't be there.

And how could it be a relay if it doesn't appear to work on the same principle as a relay, nor does it seem to be powered by eezo in the same fashion as a relay? Why doesn't it have an eezo engine? If it's a relay, why is it a beam (The relays aren't beams or lasers).

But making the claim that there was one, without any eveidence to support it, is just as bad. Smudboy carries the burden of proof in claiming that there was a beam of energy traveling from the Citadel, down to the planet. It lies with him, to show us where the beamin space is. Assuming that there is one, isn't a valid argument for what he is asserting in his argument.

A relay is an established peice of technology which are constructed by the reapers. It is logical to assume, that the technology they use to transport people down from the planet, up into space, is similiar to, or like, how a mass relay functions. Regardless, of how it is designed or acts, the relay's propell a force to a different location. What we see in the game, can be described in the same manner. Shepard is propelled from the Earth to the Citadel, by the use of the Conduit McGuffin. 

I have no idea what the beam is, but don't you need a Mass Effect field in order to interact with a Relay? All ships need to use one to pass through a Relay. You get through the Conduit on Ilos by using the Mako's ME field. I'm not sure if the ME field a suit can genearte would be sufficient but since Shepards is half burnt-off anyway, I doubt that had anything to do with it.

It may have just been a trick of the light but I thought in the first cinematic of the Citadel over Earth we saw a pale plue light culminating at the base of the Citadel. I assume that's what Smudboy uses as his evidence that the beam is meant to be touching the Citadel (right or wrong).

This is the only video I could find (fast foward to 44:20):
 

[Ninja Stan]

And this thread is done.

End of line.