234 réponses à ce sujet

[zambot]

RiouHotaru wrote...

So...a large chunk of people hate Synthesis because it's ridiculously advanced science (coined as "Space Magic" because it's outside our realm of understanding)...

...But no one has a problem with the "Space Magic" that is the Reapers?

I mean, I accept that the game makes them a collective uploaded consciousness of entire civilizations (ME2 implied it with Legion's statements regarding Sovereign/Nazara, and then canonized it in ME3), but that doesn't make the process by which they do it any less ridiculous or space-magicky.

And then Control does the exact same thing to Shepard (breaks Shepard down and somehow uploads his/her consciousness).

It true that almost all sci-fi uses space magic in one form or another.  What is that quote?  Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic?  It's true.  But a writer has to be careful when using magic, whether it is fantasy magic or sufficiently advanced technology.  Generally speaking, when writing sci-fi it is acceptable to introduce your sufficiently advanced technology (hereafter called SAT) in the beginning of a story.  ME establishes space relays, reapers, and other unbelievable SAT in the beginning to establish a foundation.  It says, here are the things the player needs to believe for this story to continue.  Here are the rules of the world that the rest of the game is based around.  

Introducing new SAT as the story progresses becomes more dangerous over time, especially if that SAT breaks already established rules or tries to establish rules that are greatly different.  Considering that Synthesis is introduced at the very end of the story, it was extremely risky, and in my opinion it did not work.  Consider the new rules that this SAT introduced:
- there exists technology that allows you to instantly alter the dna of every living thing in the galaxy near instantly
- there exists something that is called synthetic dna (the combination of two scientific words that together is gibberish) that gives things with real dna glowing eyes and circuit boards
- there exists something called "essence" that exists in Shepard (and all organics) that when combined with the cruicible brings something called "understanding" to machines
- this new synthetic dna along with this understanding brings eternal peace and utopia to the galaxy

Wow...that is a tall order for SAT.  Conviently it solves all of the problems Shepard has in the game and is introduced right at the climax as a resolution, much like a Deus Ex Machima.   I consider this to be a big mistake by the writers, and that's why people call it "Space Magic".

Modifié par zambot, 07 juillet 2012 - 09:30 .

[Ticonderoga117]

zambot wrote...
It true that almost all sci-fi uses space magic in one form or another.  What is that quote?  Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic?  It's true.  But a writer has to be careful when using magic, whether it is fantasy magic or sufficiently advanced technology.  Generally speaking, when writing sci-fi it is acceptable to introduce your sufficiently advanced technology (hereafter called SAT) in the beginning of a story.  ME establishes space relays, reapers, and other unbelievable SAT in the beginning to establish a foundation.  It says, here are the things the player needs to believe for this story to continue.  Here are the rules of the world that the rest of the game is based around.  

Introducing new SAT as the story progresses becomes more dangerous over time, especially if that SAT breaks already established rules or tries to establish rules that are greatly different.  Considering that Synthesis is introduced at the very end of the story, it was extremely risky, and in my opinion it did not work.  Consider the new rules that this SAT introduced:
- there exists technology that allows you to instantly alter the dna of every living thing in the galaxy near instantly
- there exists something that is called synthetic dna (the combination of two scientific words that together is gibberish) that gives things with real dna glowing eyes and circuit boards
- there exists something called "essence" that exists in Shepard (and all organics) that when combined with the cruicible brings something called "understanding" to machines
- this new synthetic dna along with this understanding brings eternal peace and utopia to the galaxy

Wow...that is a tall order for SAT.  Conviently it solves all of the problems Shepard has in the game and is introduced right at the climax as a resolution, much like a Deus Ex Machima.   I consider this to be a big mistake by the writers, and that's why people call it "Space Magic".

+10
Excellent anaylsis of "Introduced Space Magic is ok, butt pulls are not" in SciFi.

[Memnon]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

If you don't see the difference in degree, then you can go on and have your space utopia. Thoughts are just electrical impulses in the brain. Thinking that those impulses could somehow be uploaded to a computer doesn't take much suspension of disbelief. A wave of energy that somehow gives every living being in the galaxy some sort of synthetic-organic DNA basically throws everything we know about biology out the window.

This should have ended the thread right here ...

[Xamufam]

[quote]Stornskar wrote...

[quote]Tealjaker94 wrote...

If you don't see the difference in degree, then you can go on and have your space utopia. Thoughts are just electrical impulses in the brain. Thinking that those impulses could somehow be uploaded to a computer doesn't take much suspension of disbelief. A wave of energy that somehow gives every living being in the galaxy some sort of synthetic-organic DNA basically throws everything we know about biology out the window.[/quote]

This should have ended the thread right here ...

[/quote]
Here is more

[quote]eddieoctane wrote...
The
function of the crucible is incredibly difficult to believe. A
homogenous burst of radiation would cause random mutations in DNA. SO
the sythesis pulse would have to actually be a series of directed beams,
each tuned to each atom in the galaxy to re-arrange the physical
structure of the object (DNA molecule, leaves in a tree, Joker's eyes,
etc) being altered. A computer that could do this would 1: violate the
Heisenberg uncertainty principle (requiring to know more about the
particles being influenced than can actually be known) and 2: require a
size greater than at least the colelctive mass of the particles being
altered by the pulse. Laplace's demon deals with this very concept-a
computer should be capable of calculating all possible events ina purely
deterministic universe, but would have to be larger than said universe
to function.

Maybe that went over some people's heads, but it breaks down to this: SPACE MAGIC IS CRAP!

Modifié par Troxa, 07 juillet 2012 - 10:03 .

[Heeden]

DNA molecules aren't rearranged, they're given a coating of green magic.

This is as easy to achieve as broadcasting the Control and Destroy signals.

[Torrible]

eddieoctane wrote...
The
function of the crucible is incredibly difficult to believe. A
homogenous burst of radiation would cause random mutations in DNA. SO
the sythesis pulse would have to actually be a series of directed beams,
each tuned to each atom in the galaxy to re-arrange the physical
structure of the object (DNA molecule, leaves in a tree, Joker's eyes,
etc) being altered. A computer that could do this would 1: violate the
Heisenberg uncertainty principle (requiring to know more about the
particles being influenced than can actually be known) and 2: require a
size greater than at least the colelctive mass of the particles being
altered by the pulse. Laplace's demon deals with this very concept-a
computer should be capable of calculating all possible events ina purely
deterministic universe, but would have to be larger than said universe
to function.

Maybe that went over some people's heads, but it breaks down to this: SPACE MAGIC IS CRAP!

Is this guy trying to use real-life science to debunk Synthesis?

Just read this: 
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/FTL 

and tell me how much of it is based on real-life science?

Heisenberg uncertainty principle is a hypothesis (pretty shaky one at that), not a proven theory. In the MEU, with eezo and what not, particles interact based on completely different laws.

Modifié par Torrible, 07 juillet 2012 - 10:26 .

[Xamufam]

Torrible wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...
The
function of the crucible is incredibly difficult to believe. A
homogenous burst of radiation would cause random mutations in DNA. SO
the sythesis pulse would have to actually be a series of directed beams,
each tuned to each atom in the galaxy to re-arrange the physical
structure of the object (DNA molecule, leaves in a tree, Joker's eyes,
etc) being altered. A computer that could do this would 1: violate the
Heisenberg uncertainty principle (requiring to know more about the
particles being influenced than can actually be known) and 2: require a
size greater than at least the colelctive mass of the particles being
altered by the pulse. Laplace's demon deals with this very concept-a
computer should be capable of calculating all possible events ina purely
deterministic universe, but would have to be larger than said universe
to function.

Maybe that went over some people's heads, but it breaks down to this: SPACE MAGIC IS CRAP!

Is this guy trying to use real-life science to debunk Synthesis?

Just read this: 
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/FTL

and tell me how much of it is based on real-life science?

There are theories that state the speed of light in a true vacuum is
infinite. Space, however, is filled with "stuff". Dark matter, dust,
gas, maybe even dark energy. An adequate repulsive force--in reality
electromagnetism, in the game eezo-produced anti-gravity--could generate
a corridor of mass-free space (pretty sure the codex says this is how
relays work), allowing for instantaneous travel through the corridor.
That's no fiction, it's actual theoretical physics. I hope that makes
some sense.
& it's a science fiction not a science fantasy game

[Torrible]

Troxa wrote...

Torrible wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...
The
function of the crucible is incredibly difficult to believe. A
homogenous burst of radiation would cause random mutations in DNA. SO
the sythesis pulse would have to actually be a series of directed beams,
each tuned to each atom in the galaxy to re-arrange the physical
structure of the object (DNA molecule, leaves in a tree, Joker's eyes,
etc) being altered. A computer that could do this would 1: violate the
Heisenberg uncertainty principle (requiring to know more about the
particles being influenced than can actually be known) and 2: require a
size greater than at least the colelctive mass of the particles being
altered by the pulse. Laplace's demon deals with this very concept-a
computer should be capable of calculating all possible events ina purely
deterministic universe, but would have to be larger than said universe
to function.

Maybe that went over some people's heads, but it breaks down to this: SPACE MAGIC IS CRAP!

Is this guy trying to use real-life science to debunk Synthesis?

Just read this: 
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/FTL

and tell me how much of it is based on real-life science?

There are theories that state the speed of light in a true vacuum is
infinite. Space, however, is filled with "stuff". Dark matter, dust,
gas, maybe even dark energy. An adequate repulsive force--in reality
electromagnetism, in the game eezo-produced anti-gravity--could generate
a corridor of mass-free space (pretty sure the codex says this is how
relays work), allowing for instantaneous travel through the corridor.
That's no fiction, it's actual theoretical physics. I hope that makes
some sense.
& it's a science fiction not a science fantasy game

I'm very skeptical (the wiki article made me LOL) but I'll take your word for it for now. Thanks for the calm and informative response.

Modifié par Torrible, 07 juillet 2012 - 10:31 .

[Heeden]

Troxa wrote...
There are theories that state the speed of light in a true vacuum is
infinite. Space, however, is filled with "stuff". Dark matter, dust,
gas, maybe even dark energy. An adequate repulsive force--in reality
electromagnetism, in the game eezo-produced anti-gravity--could generate
a corridor of mass-free space (pretty sure the codex says this is how
relays work), allowing for instantaneous travel through the corridor.
That's no fiction, it's actual theoretical physics. I hope that makes
some sense.
& it's a science fiction not a science fantasy game

That's incorrect. The problem with exceeding the speed of light is as your velocity increase your inertial mass also increases - this isn't to do with pieces of matter getting in the way, it's the "drag" of the fabric of space-time. As you approach the speed of light the energy required to accelerate approaches infinity, reducing the mass of your craft will allow you to get closer to light-speed quickly but to break the light barrier still requires infinite energy.

Lensman used a very similar system but their drives made the ship inertialess, whereas eezo is shown to effect gravitational mass by they way it can also generate singularities and artificial gravity (which has another set of issues associated with it).

[LordEvan88]

The thing that separates sci-fi from fantasy is a set of rules. If people have implants or psychic abilities that allow them special powers, that is fine. But there mus be a scientific (sounding) explanation. I heard a great lecture once on how Frankenstein is the first science fiction novel, because even though what happens is crazy there is a scientific explanation to it. He uses electricity to re-animate the dead. Yeah, its ridiculous, but it is still a rule within the book.

Mass Effect essentially has 'space magic' in the form of biotics, but it has an explanation so it is admissible. It also has FTL travel, which might as well be magic too, but it has a very elaborate explanation so it is science fiction.

But there is no precedent, no known technology that can alter every single living being on a biological level. The logistics of it are too complex in the Mass Effect universe. Hence why synthesis is Space Magic and the reapers are giant robot crabs that more or less function like the Borg in Star Trek.

[TheCrazyHobo]

RiouHotaru wrote...

So...a large chunk of people hate Synthesis because it's ridiculously advanced science (coined as "Space Magic" because it's outside our realm of understanding)...

...But no one has a problem with the "Space Magic" that is the Reapers?

I mean, I accept that the game makes them a collective uploaded consciousness of entire civilizations (ME2 implied it with Legion's statements regarding Sovereign/Nazara, and then canonized it in ME3), but that doesn't make the process by which they do it any less ridiculous or space-magicky.

And then Control does the exact same thing to Shepard (breaks Shepard down and somehow uploads his/her consciousness).

"Space Magic" was just a term used out of frustration. The real issue is the fact that it goes far beyond the technology represented throughout the series.  

Synthesis not only augments Organics in the fashion of the David Sarif ending to Dues Ex, it also somehow updates the programming of every single different AI to make them "understand" and "accept" Organics.  Oh and by the way, this is the same Cuicible which the Catalyst stated as "too basic" to discriminate between Reapers and other robots.

Now do you understand the problem?   

[Heeden]

I've already pointed out that a biological change is not in the Catalyst's description of Synthesis, and whilst there is a heavy dose of space-magic it is not too different from the already established space magic of the Asari, Thorian and Protheans.

[TMA LIVE]

Yes, some people prefer machines made out of millions of human goo that'll save the galaxy from Dark Energy "somehow" (which of course can't be made without the entire human race going extinct). But weird green Energy changing my DNA to integrate with robots?

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 07 juillet 2012 - 10:53 .

[Heeden]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Synthesis not only augments Organics in the fashion of the David Sarif ending to Dues Ex, it also somehow updates the programming of every single different AI to make them "understand" and "accept" Organics.  Oh and by the way, this is the same Cuicible which the Catalyst stated as "too basic" to discriminate between Reapers and other robots.

Now do you understand the problem?   

I should probably check out the Deus Ex ending at some point, but Synthesis does not reprogram the AI. It allows organics to fully integrate with technology, this in turn allows synthetics to understand organics.

[Grimwick]

[quote]RiouHotaru wrote...

[quote]Grimwick wrote...

WTF.

Declaring something as space magic but leaving other things which are space magic out is not hypocrisy. You can't be hypocritical through omission...

I, nor nearly everyone else, have never declared any of those examples of yours as not being space magic and you don't really have any grounds to this thread. It's obvious you haven't spent enough time reading people's opinions on the BSN or you'd relaise that everyone has already pointed out these flaws.

Also, the fact that something else is space magic too is NOT a justification for the use of space magic in synthesis. That's absurd.

And refusal is a red herring here... morality has nothing to do with space magic so don't try to bring it into the equation. 

[On an unrelated note refusal is morally/logically superior unless you use metaevidence - in which case it becomes debatable and opinionated.]
[/quote]

The point is there are instances of space magic people accept, and then Synthesis magically (ha!) becomes unacceptable simply because there's no pseudo-science for it.  It's hypocrisy.  There's no pseudo-science explaining the Reapers, but they're accepted.[/quote]

Name an instance of space magic which is generally accepted...

The existance of the reapers you say? It is possible.. what's not possible about a really big AI?

[quote][And TAO's debate on metagaming was debunked already][/quote]

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

[/quote]

[Heeden]

Grimwick wrote...

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

The problem was the assertion meta-evidence had to be used. We know from the game that not using the Crucible results in our whole cycle being harvested so without using meta-evidence we can assume the results of the other choices could be preferable (depending on your moral values and whether you actually like the galaxy).

[TheCrazyHobo]

Heeden wrote...

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

Synthesis not only augments Organics in the fashion of the David Sarif ending to Dues Ex, it also somehow updates the programming of every single different AI to make them "understand" and "accept" Organics.  Oh and by the way, this is the same Cuicible which the Catalyst stated as "too basic" to discriminate between Reapers and other robots.

Now do you understand the problem?   

I should probably check out the Deus Ex ending at some point, but Synthesis does not reprogram the AI. It allows organics to fully integrate with technology, this in turn allows synthetics to understand organics.

I respectfully disagree, watch the scene where they are placing Shepherd's name on the memorial wall in the Synthesis ending, EDI express emotion and is almost shown crying.  Compared to the Control ending this is a massive change.  

Modifié par TheCrazyHobo, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:46 .

[Grimwick]

Heeden wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

The problem was the assertion meta-evidence had to be used. We know from the game that not using the Crucible results in our whole cycle being harvested so without using meta-evidence we can assume the results of the other choices could be preferable (depending on your moral values and whether you actually like the galaxy).

All we know from refuse is that it is rejecting the SC's solutions. Based on the fact that without meta-evidence we should take it that he is lying then we shouldn't trust him. Ergo choosing none of his solutions is the only logical choice and hence refuse..

[zambot]

Grimwick wrote...

Heeden wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

The problem was the assertion meta-evidence had to be used. We know from the game that not using the Crucible results in our whole cycle being harvested so without using meta-evidence we can assume the results of the other choices could be preferable (depending on your moral values and whether you actually like the galaxy).

All we know from refuse is that it is rejecting the SC's solutions. Based on the fact that without meta-evidence we should take it that he is lying then we shouldn't trust him. Ergo choosing none of his solutions is the only logical choice and hence refuse..

a. It is not "fact" that you should take it he is lying, with or without meta-evidence.  This is a subjective judgement that each Shepard must make.
b. It is stated clearly and consistently throughout the game that without the crucible you will lose.  To reject the crucible at the end of the game and expect a different outcome (than death) would be to reject everything you had been told by the writers up to that point. 

[Grimwick]

zambot wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Heeden wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

The problem was the assertion meta-evidence had to be used. We know from the game that not using the Crucible results in our whole cycle being harvested so without using meta-evidence we can assume the results of the other choices could be preferable (depending on your moral values and whether you actually like the galaxy).

All we know from refuse is that it is rejecting the SC's solutions. Based on the fact that without meta-evidence we should take it that he is lying then we shouldn't trust him. Ergo choosing none of his solutions is the only logical choice and hence refuse..

a. It is not "fact" that you should take it he is lying, with or without meta-evidence.  This is a subjective judgement that each Shepard must make.

Of course it is subjective... trust is subjective. The problem is that any rational person would think the same way here... The person who was trying to kill me for the past three games, attempting to wipe out all life in the galaxy, is the person I should trust. Yeah you can trust him, but it makes no sense to a rational, logical mind.

b. It is stated clearly and consistently throughout the game that without the crucible you will lose.  To reject the crucible at the end of the game and expect a different outcome (than death) would be to reject everything you had been told by the writers up to that point. 

I'm afraid I do not take this as evidence. It was stated repeatedly and clearly in ME2 that it was a 'suicide mission'... but I ended up with everyone left alive. There are several points in the game we are also expected to reject with reference to previous events and selecting this one as the only exception is unjustified.

[zambot]

Grimwick wrote...


Of course it is subjective... trust is subjective. The problem is that any rational person would think the same way here... The person who was trying to kill me for the past three games, attempting to wipe out all life in the galaxy, is the person I should trust. Yeah you can trust him, but it makes no sense to a rational, logical mind.

That is a matter of opinion.  I find it irrational to believe someone is lying purely because you see them as an enemy.  I agree that you should not trust him, but you should listen to him and decide if what he is saying is true.  Why is he tellilng you this?  What are his motives?  Ultimately it is not logical to automatically assume even an enemy is a liar.  

Grimwick wrote... 

I'm afraid I do not take this as evidence. It was stated repeatedly and clearly in ME2 that it was a 'suicide mission'... but I ended up with everyone left alive. There are several points in the game we are also expected to reject with reference to previous events and selecting this one as the only exception is unjustified.

Regardless of whether you take it as evidence, it is evidence.  It may be reasonable to believe it to be nothing more than a story telling mechanic designed to create tension given the events of ME2.  I suspect that's why a great number of the fans are upset as refusal.  They feel the writers betrayed them by expecting the impossible to be possible because that was the theme up to that point.  That's fair.  But it's not meta-gaming to assume that the writers were in fact telling the truth this time.

[Heeden]

Grimwick wrote...

zambot wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

Heeden wrote...

Grimwick wrote...

No it wasn't. No it really wasn't. Meta-evidence cannot justify a decision, ever. In any context let alone mass effect.

The problem was the assertion meta-evidence had to be used. We know from the game that not using the Crucible results in our whole cycle being harvested so without using meta-evidence we can assume the results of the other choices could be preferable (depending on your moral values and whether you actually like the galaxy).

All we know from refuse is that it is rejecting the SC's solutions. Based on the fact that without meta-evidence we should take it that he is lying then we shouldn't trust him. Ergo choosing none of his solutions is the only logical choice and hence refuse..

a. It is not "fact" that you should take it he is lying, with or without meta-evidence.  This is a subjective judgement that each Shepard must make.

Of course it is subjective... trust is subjective. The problem is that any rational person would think the same way here... The person who was trying to kill me for the past three games, attempting to wipe out all life in the galaxy, is the person I should trust. Yeah you can trust him, but it makes no sense to a rational, logical mind.

Bull-poop. I saw no reason to distrust the Catalyst because had nothing to gain from lying. Even if I did the certainty of everyone dying weighed against the possibility of something else would be enough to persuade me to take a chance. Worst case scenario (for me) comes from refusal. Second worst (everyone indoctrinated) the Reapers could have done aeons ago if that's what they wanted. After that pretty much anything is better so even if the Catalyst is lying it's worth playing along because that's where the most hope lies.

I'm afraid I do not take this as evidence. It was stated repeatedly and clearly in ME2 that it was a 'suicide mission'... but I ended up with everyone left alive. There are several points in the game we are also expected to reject with reference to previous events and selecting this one as the only exception is unjustified.

The galactic map shows Reapers everywhere, we're outnumbered and outclassed, our infrastructure is being dismantled (whilst the Reapers don't need one) and I'm fairly sure when the Reapers ceased control of the Citadel they locked down all the relays apart from Sol. Plus we just commited most of our military assets getting the Crucible in to position, there was absolutely no way a rational, logical mind could see our cycle winning.

[NoUserNameHere]

I'm sorry, but the OP just throttles the concept of 'willing suspension of disbelief' in his argument.

Extended Cut actually went balls-out and made Synthesis even more space-magic-y, imo. It kinda just ran with it -- 'cause that's what synthesis fans wanted.

[TheCrazyHobo]

Heeden wrote...

Bull-poop. I saw no reason to distrust the Catalyst because had nothing to gain from lying. Even if I did the certainty of everyone dying weighed against the possibility of something else would be enough to persuade me to take a chance. Worst case scenario (for me) comes from refusal. Second worst (everyone indoctrinated) the Reapers could have done aeons ago if that's what they wanted. After that pretty much anything is better so even if the Catalyst is lying it's worth playing along because that's where the most hope lies.

Well sir, there are two reason's why people call the the Catalyst out.  The first is his assertion is that they harvest all Organic life (and Synthetic life according to the EC) and store it in Reaper form.  This is dissproved by the conversations of Sovereign and Harbinger and the Collector's existence.  The second fact is the Catalyst's existence.  His existence pretty much nullifies the entire plot of Mass Effect 1.  By his own admission, he was an AI who reaped his creators and now guides them on the murderous killing sprees. So now instead of the Citadel being the Reaper Gateway to the universe, it is now the Reaper Overmind.    

Also, if you don't mind, you can respond to my earlier response to you. 

[Shaigunjoe]

NoUserNameHere wrote...

I'm sorry, but the OP just throttles the concept of 'willing suspension of disbelief' in his argument.

Extended Cut actually went balls-out and made Synthesis even more space-magic-y, imo. It kinda just ran with it -- 'cause that's what synthesis fans wanted.

Personally, my willing suspension of disbelief was put on a thread when Shep was resurected, and then cut when everybody climbed onboard a shuttle just to allow the collectors to attack normandy.  After that, the whole ME world was much less tangible. 

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 08 juillet 2012 - 01:40 .