661 réponses à ce sujet

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Yet yo're being a hypocrite.

Just because you know how to spell the word "hypocrite" doesn't mean you're using it correctly.

Insulting people is useless.

[What a Succulent Ass]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

I know it's going to blow your mind when I say this, but what happens in other series is irrelevant when it comes to analysing Mass Effect.

Yet space magic is everywhere in sci-fi without complaints.

A. No, it's not, as different stories set different precedents in their narrative.
B. People have debated the finer points of various sci-fi series up and down the Internet, but you are unlikely to find such complaints...ON A MASS EFFECT FORUM.
C. Because X is done poorly in Y narrative does not excuse it being done in Z story. That is a completely empty demonstrations. It is literally irrelevant.

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Yet yo're being a hypocrite.

Just because you know how to spell the word "hypocrite" doesn't mean you're using it correctly.

Insulting people is useless.

Pointing out your gross misuse of the word "hypocrite" is not an insult.

[Raelen]

o Ventus wrote...

Raelen wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Raelen wrote...

Ok, fine. I wont use a quote. I will simply say this then: They have a piece of technology that they were held by the hand and told how to build through blueprints. They state multiple times in the game that they have no idea how it works or even what it will do. It's advanced technology beyond their own comprehension much like the reapers themselves which are also not fully understood. Why then should it be fully explained besides the fact that you simply demand it to be?

I'm talking purely about what the crucible does...not about its timing or about the catalyst.

The Crucible is not the best example. The idea that you can group together thousands of the brightest minds in the galaxy and STILL not have any f**king idea of the thing you're building is downright insulting.

You can't immediately understand everything you want just because you're smart and you try hard.  Perhaps maybe in time they would be able to make guesses or figure it out, but I doubt they really had the time to do it because the entire universe was on fire practically.  Besides...we have a HUGE amount of amazingly bright medical professionals in the world and obviously we know EVERYTHING about how the human brain works amirite?

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that flint + tinder = fire. Similar to how it doesn't take an analytical genius to note the correlation between the 4 huge docking arms that are the exact same diameter as the presidium ring of the Citadel. Gee, I wonder what other object in the galaxy has those exact proportions?

Your example of the human brain is also a false one. The human brain wasn't constructed by other people using hand-me-down blueprints specifically designed to be easy to interpret.

You took incredibly simplistic things and are applying them to a foreign technology that was created by alien minds over many cycles of 50,000 years each, and you're comparing that to flint and tender?  Geometric correlation?  Really?

How long from the scientific beginning of our intelligent ancestors did it take for us to begin exploring particle physics?

And another thing, I dont know of any example really in our history where we were given "hand-me-down" blueprints for some new piece of technology that was advanced far beyond our own so there isnt really any way to compare our experiences in reality to what happened in ME3. 

And perhaps the blueprints were created with IKEA instructions for putting it together.  No cycle was ever able to finish constructing it NOR dock it with the Citadel so we could possibly assume even THEY didnt know what it would do or how it would do it either.  Or if they did, is that really pertinent for building the thing?  Or maybe it WAS listed in the archives but the data was constructed.  Or they couldnt translate it because that single part wasnt in easy to understand babytalk.  Or any number of other things.

[daecath]

[quote]Eluril wrote...

If synthesis can be dismissed as "space magic" and not plausible in the ME universe then the following can also be labeled "Space magic"

Reaper indoctrination - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi.../Indoctrination
[quote]Eluril wrote...
Reaper liquification and mind absorbtion - How does that work?
[/quote]
Not much on it, but here you go. http://masseffect.wi...ki/Human-Reaper
[quote]Eluril wrote...

Liara's gift and asari psionic abilities - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Asari
[/quote]
[quote]Eluril wrote...

The Citadel and the mass relays - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...wiki/Mass_Relay
http://masseffect.wi...ki/Element_Zero
[quote]Eluril wrote...


Guns that shoot shaved pieces of metal  - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Weapons
[quote]Eluril wrote...



Biotics - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Biotics
[quote]Eluril wrote...




Shepard absorbing the "collective conscious" of the Protheans via the Thorian - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Cipher
[quote]Eluril wrote...





The Prothean beacons - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...Prothean_Beacon

Every question that you asked has an answer. There is an in-game explanation provided by BioWare for all of this. The masseffect.wikia.com site pulls its data from the codex within the game, or in game explanations. I was able to search for and find detailed information on all of these, with the exception of the reaper reproduction which just says that people are turned into organic paste. But every other entry is a detailed explanation of the "science" behind how it works, even if the science is made up.

Now, go there and search for synthesis. You don't find an entry for it.

[quote]Eluril wrote...






The truth is science fiction only needs to be plausible to a point. I don't want people on a space ship poring over navigation charts, calculating geometry for hours or days on end. I want a setting and story that intrigues me, that gets me to think about man's relationship to technology and the future.
[/quote]
That's true. I don't need to know how an antimatter/matter reaction is channeled through dilithium crystals to generate a warp field. I just need to know that it is. I don't need to know why an electrical current channeled through element zero produces dark energy which creates a mass effect field that can manipulate an object's mass. I just need to know it does. There are certain things that you can take as fact, both in reality and in fiction. We don't need to understand how gravity is generated to know that "what goes up must come down".

But in every one of those examples, it is always shown that there is an explanation for it. You see that the characters have an understanding of it, even if we don't. We can accept it as fact because they accept it as fact. And they accept it as fact because of prior experience, either with an example of that science directly, or with a precursor.

[quote]Eluril wrote...







Mass Effect more than fulfilled this and Synthesis seems to me just as plausible an effect of the advanced technology of the Crucible as most if not all of the elements listed above.
[/quote]

The problem with Synthesis is that there is no precedent for it, and no explanation for it. You need one or the other to have an effective plot element, particularly if you are going to introduce it at the very end of your story. There's no discussion of synthetic DNA, no discovery of a technology that can generate matter from energy, no replicators or teleporters. It comes from nothing. That is what makes it space magic. And in a story like this, there is only a certain amount of that that is reasonable before the story breaks down. The reaper reproduction method is a bit space-magicy, but it works because it's reasonable. They break us down into our component parts and reassemble those parts into a reaper. That's plausible. An energy wave that can spontaneously generate matter, rewrite DNA, and/or alter metobolic functions is entirely unplausible.

However, I would be willing to accept that at some point in the past, someone had this technology and the crucible plans contained the technology to make it work, if it weren't for all the other crimes that the ending committed. The catalyst's premise of synthetics vs. organics isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The Illusive Man's ability to control the physical movements of Anderson and Shepard isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The idea that lasting peace is only attainable if everyone is the same in some way is abhorrant and goes against the rest of the story. The idea that Shepard would commit suicide, with no proof of the catalyst's claims, no guarantee that any of this will do what the catalyst claims, on the basis of a premise that is contradicted by everything that Shepard has seen, and on the word of the leader of an enemy that routinely uses manipulation to achieve their goals - that's the worst crime of the ending. So no, Synthesis gets no slack. It is space magic, and it doesn't belong in this story, no matter how many puppies and rainbows they try to shove in to get us to like it.

[Blueprotoss]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

I know it's going to blow your mind when I say this, but what happens in other series is irrelevant when it comes to analysing Mass Effect.

Yet space magic is everywhere in sci-fi without complaints.

A. No, it's not, as different stories set different precedents in their narrative.
B. People have debated the finer points of various sci-fi series up and down the Internet, but you are unlikely to find such complaints...ON A MASS EFFECT FORUM.
C. Because X is done poorly in Y narrative does not excuse it being done in Z story. That is a completely empty demonstrations. It is literally irrelevant.

All I hear is contradictions.

[What a Succulent Ass]

It also appears you don't understand why synthesis is called space magic.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

I know it's going to blow your mind when I say this, but what happens in other series is irrelevant when it comes to analysing Mass Effect.

Yet space magic is everywhere in sci-fi without complaints.

A. No, it's not, as different stories set different precedents in their narrative.
B. People have debated the finer points of various sci-fi series up and down the Internet, but you are unlikely to find such complaints...ON A MASS EFFECT FORUM.
C. Because X is done poorly in Y narrative does not excuse it being done in Z story. That is a completely empty demonstrations. It is literally irrelevant.

All I hear is contradictions.

your a contradiction

[Blueprotoss]

daecath wrote...

However, I would be willing to accept that at some point in the past, someone had this technology and the crucible plans contained the technology to make it work, if it weren't for all the other crimes that the ending committed. The catalyst's premise of synthetics vs. organics isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The Illusive Man's ability to control the physical movements of Anderson and Shepard isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The idea that lasting peace is only attainable if everyone is the same in some way is abhorrant and goes against the rest of the story. The idea that Shepard would commit suicide, with no proof of the catalyst's claims, no guarantee that any of this will do what the catalyst claims, on the basis of a premise that is contradicted by everything that Shepard has seen, and on the word of the leader of an enemy that routinely uses manipulation to achieve their goals - that's the worst crime of the ending. So no, Synthesis gets no slack. It is space magic, and it doesn't belong in this story, no matter how many puppies and rainbows they try to shove in to get us to like it.

It seems you for about the Geth/Quarian conflict and Project Overlord.  Btw Shepard would say screw you to the Reaper creator especially when he/she can save the Galaxy.

[Eluril]

[quote]daecath wrote...

[quote]Eluril wrote...

If synthesis can be dismissed as "space magic" and not plausible in the ME universe then the following can also be labeled "Space magic"

Reaper indoctrination - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi.../Indoctrination
[quote]Eluril wrote...
Reaper liquification and mind absorbtion - How does that work?
[/quote]
Not much on it, but here you go. http://masseffect.wi...ki/Human-Reaper
[quote]Eluril wrote...

Liara's gift and asari psionic abilities - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Asari
[/quote]
[quote]Eluril wrote...

The Citadel and the mass relays - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...wiki/Mass_Relay
http://masseffect.wi...ki/Element_Zero
[quote]Eluril wrote...


Guns that shoot shaved pieces of metal  - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Weapons
[quote]Eluril wrote...



Biotics - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Biotics
[quote]Eluril wrote...




Shepard absorbing the "collective conscious" of the Protheans via the Thorian - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...com/wiki/Cipher
[quote]Eluril wrote...





The Prothean beacons - How does that work?
[/quote]
http://masseffect.wi...Prothean_Beacon

Every question that you asked has an answer. There is an in-game explanation provided by BioWare for all of this. The masseffect.wikia.com site pulls its data from the codex within the game, or in game explanations. I was able to search for and find detailed information on all of these, with the exception of the reaper reproduction which just says that people are turned into organic paste. But every other entry is a detailed explanation of the "science" behind how it works, even if the science is made up.

Now, go there and search for synthesis. You don't find an entry for it.

[quote]Eluril wrote...






The truth is science fiction only needs to be plausible to a point. I don't want people on a space ship poring over navigation charts, calculating geometry for hours or days on end. I want a setting and story that intrigues me, that gets me to think about man's relationship to technology and the future.
[/quote]
That's true. I don't need to know how an antimatter/matter reaction is channeled through dilithium crystals to generate a warp field. I just need to know that it is. I don't need to know why an electrical current channeled through element zero produces dark energy which creates a mass effect field that can manipulate an object's mass. I just need to know it does. There are certain things that you can take as fact, both in reality and in fiction. We don't need to understand how gravity is generated to know that "what goes up must come down".

But in every one of those examples, it is always shown that there is an explanation for it. You see that the characters have an understanding of it, even if we don't. We can accept it as fact because they accept it as fact. And they accept it as fact because of prior experience, either with an example of that science directly, or with a precursor.

[quote]Eluril wrote...







Mass Effect more than fulfilled this and Synthesis seems to me just as plausible an effect of the advanced technology of the Crucible as most if not all of the elements listed above.
[/quote]

The problem with Synthesis is that there is no precedent for it, and no explanation for it. You need one or the other to have an effective plot element, particularly if you are going to introduce it at the very end of your story. There's no discussion of synthetic DNA, no discovery of a technology that can generate matter from energy, no replicators or teleporters. It comes from nothing. That is what makes it space magic. And in a story like this, there is only a certain amount of that that is reasonable before the story breaks down. The reaper reproduction method is a bit space-magicy, but it works because it's reasonable. They break us down into our component parts and reassemble those parts into a reaper. That's plausible. An energy wave that can spontaneously generate matter, rewrite DNA, and/or alter metobolic functions is entirely unplausible.

However, I would be willing to accept that at some point in the past, someone had this technology and the crucible plans contained the technology to make it work, if it weren't for all the other crimes that the ending committed. The catalyst's premise of synthetics vs. organics isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The Illusive Man's ability to control the physical movements of Anderson and Shepard isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The idea that lasting peace is only attainable if everyone is the same in some way is abhorrant and goes against the rest of the story. The idea that Shepard would commit suicide, with no proof of the catalyst's claims, no guarantee that any of this will do what the catalyst claims, on the basis of a premise that is contradicted by everything that Shepard has seen, and on the word of the leader of an enemy that routinely uses manipulation to achieve their goals - that's the worst crime of the ending. So no, Synthesis gets no slack. It is space magic, and it doesn't belong in this story, no matter how many puppies and rainbows they try to shove in to get us to like it.
[/quote]

If you hate the game, and it's clear you do by your ranting and raving and the links in your signature, then seriously just leave. I'm fine with debating people, pointing out flaws etc, but it makes no sense to me why you would waste your time coming here. It'd be like me going to a Star Wars prequel forum. I don't like them, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything about them. I can easily piece apart many of the things you listed (just a quick example the idea that synthesis destroys individuality and diversity) but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

Modifié par Eluril, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:08 .

[Blueprotoss]

Random Jerkface wrote...

It also appears you don't understand why synthesis is called space magic.

It is space magic just like biotics and most of what makes up ME.

[o Ventus]

Raelen wrote...

You took incredibly simplistic things and are applying them to a foreign technology that was created by alien minds over many cycles of 50,000 years each, and you're comparing that to flint and tender?  Geometric correlation?  Really?

How long from the scientific beginning of our intelligent ancestors did it take for us to begin exploring particle physics?

And another thing, I dont know of any example really in our history where we were given "hand-me-down" blueprints for some new piece of technology that was advanced far beyond our own so there isnt really any way to compare our experiences in reality to what happened in ME3. 

And perhaps the blueprints were created with IKEA instructions for putting it together.  No cycle was ever able to finish constructing it NOR dock it with the Citadel so we could possibly assume even THEY didnt know what it would do or how it would do it either.  Or if they did, is that really pertinent for building the thing?  Or maybe it WAS listed in the archives but the data was constructed.  Or they couldnt translate it because that single part wasnt in easy to understand babytalk.  Or any number of other things.

Semantics. My point is that if you are educated in something and you're working on a project involving "unknowns", you can still form a semi-reasonable hypothesis on any predicatable effects said project may have. Again, it doesn't take a genius to figure that flint + flammable substance = fire.

Congratulations, you just asserted the notion that your Crucible-Brain comparison was false, and I didn't even employ any trick psychology. Kudos to you.

Did you honestly just insinuate that the knowledge of the Crucible docking onto the Citadel is NOT pertinent information? I don't need to point out how stupid that is, do I?

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

I know it's going to blow your mind when I say this, but what happens in other series is irrelevant when it comes to analysing Mass Effect.

Yet space magic is everywhere in sci-fi without complaints.

A. No, it's not, as different stories set different precedents in their narrative.
B. People have debated the finer points of various sci-fi series up and down the Internet, but you are unlikely to find such complaints...ON A MASS EFFECT FORUM.
C. Because X is done poorly in Y narrative does not excuse it being done in Z story. That is a completely empty demonstrations. It is literally irrelevant.

All I hear is contradictions.

your a contradiction

Yet you still act that sci-fi is supposed to be non-fiction.

[Ticonderoga117]

Raelen wrote...
You can't immediately understand everything you want just because you're smart and you try hard.  Perhaps maybe in time they would be able to make guesses or figure it out, but I doubt they really had the time to do it because the entire universe was on fire practically.  Besides...we have a HUGE amount of amazingly bright medical professionals in the world and obviously we know EVERYTHING about how the human brain works amirite?

It was a battery. A big, honking, eezo battery. If the engineers and scientist couldn't figure that out, they deserve to have thier diplomas taken.

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Raelen wrote...

You took incredibly simplistic things and are applying them to a foreign technology that was created by alien minds over many cycles of 50,000 years each, and you're comparing that to flint and tender?  Geometric correlation?  Really?

How long from the scientific beginning of our intelligent ancestors did it take for us to begin exploring particle physics?

And another thing, I dont know of any example really in our history where we were given "hand-me-down" blueprints for some new piece of technology that was advanced far beyond our own so there isnt really any way to compare our experiences in reality to what happened in ME3. 

And perhaps the blueprints were created with IKEA instructions for putting it together.  No cycle was ever able to finish constructing it NOR dock it with the Citadel so we could possibly assume even THEY didnt know what it would do or how it would do it either.  Or if they did, is that really pertinent for building the thing?  Or maybe it WAS listed in the archives but the data was constructed.  Or they couldnt translate it because that single part wasnt in easy to understand babytalk.  Or any number of other things.

Semantics. My point is that if you are educated in something and you're working on a project involving "unknowns", you can still form a semi-reasonable hypothesis on any predicatable effects said project may have. Again, it doesn't take a genius to figure that flint + flammable substance = fire.

Congratulations, you just asserted the notion that your Crucible-Brain comparison was false, and I didn't even employ any trick psychology. Kudos to you.

Did you honestly just insinuate that the knowledge of the Crucible docking onto the Citadel is NOT pertinent information? I don't need to point out how stupid that is, do I?

Yet you're mad at ME over semantics.

[Krunjar]

@ O Ventus

You responded to my assertion that a plot device coming in at the last minute isn't a bad thing with:

"When a plot element comes out of nowhere it is not inherently bad. When it's a plot element that dictates the flow of the story and it comes from nowhere, then yes it is bad."

At this point I made the natural assumption you where talking about the catalyst seeing as the Crucible comes from the mars archives and is therefore just as well rooted as all the other space magic you are conveniently defending as "plausible". Like Eezo, The mass relays, Biotics etc. Just cos you don't like it doesn't change the fact that it belongs just as much as biotics.

I responded by stating that the Catalyst did not dictate the flow of the story as it only turned up for the last bit of it.

To which you stated

"Doesn't dictate the flow of the story? Literally everything you do in ME3 besides the coup and Tuchanka is directly tied into building the Crucible or obtaining more resources for it. The Crucible is the backbone of ME3's plot, it's undeniable."

Assuming that from your argument you equated the crucible to the catalyst I called you on that. To which you replied.

"... Huh? When did I ever say or imply anything about the Catalyst?"


So we have a few options.

A) You didn't read my post properly

You willfully twisted my meaning to suit your needs.

C) You are the subtle kind of troll and avoided mentioning the crucible by name till late at the game on purpose.

Either way ... your either an idiot, an *rse or a troll.

Modifié par Krunjar, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:10 .

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

daecath wrote...

However, I would be willing to accept that at some point in the past, someone had this technology and the crucible plans contained the technology to make it work, if it weren't for all the other crimes that the ending committed. The catalyst's premise of synthetics vs. organics isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The Illusive Man's ability to control the physical movements of Anderson and Shepard isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The idea that lasting peace is only attainable if everyone is the same in some way is abhorrant and goes against the rest of the story. The idea that Shepard would commit suicide, with no proof of the catalyst's claims, no guarantee that any of this will do what the catalyst claims, on the basis of a premise that is contradicted by everything that Shepard has seen, and on the word of the leader of an enemy that routinely uses manipulation to achieve their goals - that's the worst crime of the ending. So no, Synthesis gets no slack. It is space magic, and it doesn't belong in this story, no matter how many puppies and rainbows they try to shove in to get us to like it.

It seems you for about the Geth/Quarian conflict and Project Overlord.  Btw Shepard would say screw you to the Reaper creator especially when he/she can save the Galaxy.

1. the Geth didn't even want to kill the Quarians or anybody
2. the Geth/Quarian conflict is a crap excuse to havest all advanced organics
3. If you made peace between them that logic is still nonsensical

Modifié par AresKeith, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:14 .

[o Ventus]

Eluril wrote...

If you hate the game, and it's clear you do by your ranting and raving and the links in your signature, then seriously just leave. I'm fine with debating people, pointing out flaws etc, but it makes no sense to me why you would waste your time coming here. It'd be like me going to a Star Wars prequel forum. I don't like them, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything about them. I can easily piece apart many of the things you listed (just a quick example the idea that synthesis destroys individuality and diversity) but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

I must say, I love how you disregard the entirety of that person's post on the sole basis of the contents of their signature. 

Ooooh, do mine next.

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Raelen wrote...
You can't immediately understand everything you want just because you're smart and you try hard.  Perhaps maybe in time they would be able to make guesses or figure it out, but I doubt they really had the time to do it because the entire universe was on fire practically.  Besides...we have a HUGE amount of amazingly bright medical professionals in the world and obviously we know EVERYTHING about how the human brain works amirite?

It was a battery. A big, honking, eezo battery. If the engineers and scientist couldn't figure that out, they deserve to have thier diplomas taken.

Yet ME isn't real.

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

daecath wrote...

However, I would be willing to accept that at some point in the past, someone had this technology and the crucible plans contained the technology to make it work, if it weren't for all the other crimes that the ending committed. The catalyst's premise of synthetics vs. organics isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The Illusive Man's ability to control the physical movements of Anderson and Shepard isn't supported anywhere else in the story. The idea that lasting peace is only attainable if everyone is the same in some way is abhorrant and goes against the rest of the story. The idea that Shepard would commit suicide, with no proof of the catalyst's claims, no guarantee that any of this will do what the catalyst claims, on the basis of a premise that is contradicted by everything that Shepard has seen, and on the word of the leader of an enemy that routinely uses manipulation to achieve their goals - that's the worst crime of the ending. So no, Synthesis gets no slack. It is space magic, and it doesn't belong in this story, no matter how many puppies and rainbows they try to shove in to get us to like it.

It seems you for about the Geth/Quarian conflict and Project Overlord.  Btw Shepard would say screw you to the Reaper creator especially when he/she can save the Galaxy.

1. the Geth didn't even want to kill the Quarians or anybody
2. the Geth/Quarian conflict is a crap excuse to havest all advanced organics
3. If you made peace between them that logic is still nonsensical

Yet the Geth still defend themesleves, the creator vs the created is a well known theme in sci-fi, and war can still occur after peace.

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Eluril wrote...

If you hate the game, and it's clear you do by your ranting and raving and the links in your signature, then seriously just leave. I'm fine with debating people, pointing out flaws etc, but it makes no sense to me why you would waste your time coming here. It'd be like me going to a Star Wars prequel forum. I don't like them, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything about them. I can easily piece apart many of the things you listed (just a quick example the idea that synthesis destroys individuality and diversity) but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

I must say, I love how you disregard the entirety of that person's post on the sole basis of the contents of their signature. 

Ooooh, do mine next.

Yet you keep on doing that.

[o Ventus]

Krunjar wrote...

@ O Ventus

You responded to my assertion that a plot device coming in at the last minute isn't a bad thing with:

"When a plot element comes out of nowhere it is not inherently bad. When it's a plot element that dictates the flow of the story and it comes from nowhere, then yes it is bad."

At this point I made the natural assumption you where talking about the catalyst seeing as the Crucible comes from the mars archives and is therefore just as well rooted as all the other space magic you are conveniently defending as "plausible". Like Eezo, The mass relays, Biotics etc. Just cos you don't like it doesn't change the fact that it belongs just as much as biotics.

It does not belong. I won't waste my time explaining to you why it doesn't. You can read the various other posts in this thread, or the various other threads on this site for more information.
I responded by stating that the Catalyst did not dictate the flow of the story as it only turned up for the last bit of it.

Either way ... your either an idiot, an *rse or a troll.

You're the one who thought I was talking about the Catalyst when I explicitly said "Crucible". Kudos to you.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Random Jerkface wrote...

I know it's going to blow your mind when I say this, but what happens in other series is irrelevant when it comes to analysing Mass Effect.

Yet space magic is everywhere in sci-fi without complaints.

A. No, it's not, as different stories set different precedents in their narrative.
B. People have debated the finer points of various sci-fi series up and down the Internet, but you are unlikely to find such complaints...ON A MASS EFFECT FORUM.
C. Because X is done poorly in Y narrative does not excuse it being done in Z story. That is a completely empty demonstrations. It is literally irrelevant.

All I hear is contradictions.

your a contradiction

Yet you still act that sci-fi is supposed to be non-fiction.

find my comment that states that or your lying to your self

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Eluril wrote...

If you hate the game, and it's clear you do by your ranting and raving and the links in your signature, then seriously just leave. I'm fine with debating people, pointing out flaws etc, but it makes no sense to me why you would waste your time coming here. It'd be like me going to a Star Wars prequel forum. I don't like them, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything about them. I can easily piece apart many of the things you listed (just a quick example the idea that synthesis destroys individuality and diversity) but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

I must say, I love how you disregard the entirety of that person's post on the sole basis of the contents of their signature. 

Ooooh, do mine next.

Yet you keep on doing that.

So how many times have I commented on people's signatures?

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Eluril wrote...

If you hate the game, and it's clear you do by your ranting and raving and the links in your signature, then seriously just leave. I'm fine with debating people, pointing out flaws etc, but it makes no sense to me why you would waste your time coming here. It'd be like me going to a Star Wars prequel forum. I don't like them, so I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything about them. I can easily piece apart many of the things you listed (just a quick example the idea that synthesis destroys individuality and diversity) but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

I must say, I love how you disregard the entirety of that person's post on the sole basis of the contents of their signature. 

Ooooh, do mine next.

Yet you keep on doing that.

So how many times have I commented on people's signatures?

The real question is when don't you insult people.