661 réponses à ce sujet

[daecath]

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 but truthfully you're not worth the time. (points to the door)

Nice. Did you bother to take the time to actually read what I wrote, or did you simply find it easier to dismiss me as a "hater"? If you can't be bothered to argue any of the points I make about the topic at hand with any intelligence, that's fine. But I leave when I choose to leave. In point of fact, I do like this game. I am disappointed with certain elements of it, but other elements I think were even better than the other two.

[Ticonderoga117]

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet ME isn't real.

But to those fictional character's it's real, and since they don't call it magic, but engineering, if they can't figure out the big battery they're workign on is a big battery, they are either completely stupid, or subject to bad writing.

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

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

This whole topic.

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

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

Do you ever stick to 1 subject, or do you always jump around when you have no retort to the previous post?

[Raelen]

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?

You didnt need to use trick psychology.  I agree with you.  My comparison was faulty.  *Shrug*  Plus, I dont know how many people were highly educated about alien technologies from over 50,000 years ago. 

And no, I insinuated that explaining the science behind it, the intricacies of its functions or every little thing about it besides the most basic requirements for activating it might have not been pertinent.  I also insinuated a LOT of other possibilities which you completely disregarded.  Along with a few other points in my post.

[Krunjar]

o Ventus wrote...

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.

No in fact just re read all youre replies to me to be sure. You didn;t mention that it was the crucible you where talking about till just before I called you on it. And since I was talking about a plot device at the "last minute" was pretty clear I was talking about the catalyst.

Modifié par Krunjar, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:23 .

[Eluril]

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.

No I disregard it because it sidesteps my entire argument which is 1. that other well known sci-fi series use "space magic" type things all the time and 2. even within Mass Effect there is all kinds of space magic besides Synthesis.

Again and again people point to the codex as the end all be all "this makes it SCIENCE!!" argument when in fact the in-game explanations (meaning dialogue IN THE GAME) is either minimal or non-existent for explaining various aspects in the game. A throwaway line of dialogue about "Oh this metal if subjected to a current let's everyone be an X-man for the day" is a-o-freaking-k but within the game a fairly extensive discussion by the Catalyst by IN-GAME standards about what synthesis is is just thrown aside because we can't read a few lines of small text in the Codex to make it "SCIENCE!!!"

and 3. The complaint "space magic" is meaningless geek babble. I'd much rather debate themes, characters, morality and the future of the galaxy than to get into a pointless geek debate about (heavy mouth breather) "It's not actually SCIENCE!!!"

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet ME isn't real.

But to those fictional character's it's real, and since they don't call it magic, but engineering, if they can't figure out the big battery they're workign on is a big battery, they are either completely stupid, or subject to bad writing.

Yet writing is subjective just like fan fiction while I don't hear outcries about space magic from Star Wars, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica.

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

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

Do you ever stick to 1 subject, or do you always jump around when you have no retort to the previous post?

Insulting people still won't help you.

[o Ventus]

Raelen wrote...

You didnt need to use trick psychology.  I agree with you.  My comparison was faulty.  *Shrug*  Plus, I dont know how many people were highly educated about alien technologies from over 50,000 years ago.  

And no, I insinuated that explaining the science behind it, the intricacies of its functions or every little thing about it besides the most basic requirements for activating it might have not been pertinent.  I also insinuated a LOT of other possibilities which you completely disregarded.  Along with a few other points in my post.

@bold, Liara - protheans. 

I didn't disregard anything. I focused on that 1 particular point because it stood out to me the most. How the hell would the Crucible's functions NOT be a pertinent thing?

[o Ventus]

Krunjar wrote...

No in fact just re read all youre replies to me to be sure. You didn;t mention that it was the crucible you where talking about till just before I called you on it. And since I was talking about a plot device at the "last minute" was pretty clear I was talking about the catalyst.

Literally everybody (Except you, I guess) had been talking about the Crucible up to that point when they were referencing a "last minute plot device". I didn't think I had to point it out. Before you make rabid assertions, at least doa  little background research.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

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

This whole topic.

so your lying to yourself then, cuz I read my comments and I said Sci-fi is built around a level of Science thats its called Science Fiction not Super Fantasy

so you need to stop putting words in people mouths and if you find this an insult I feel sorry for you

[daecath]

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.

No, actually the geth/quarian conflict absolutely disproves the catalyst's assertion.

"The created will always rebel against their creators." At no point in any of the three games do we see a single example of a synthetic creation making the willful, unprovoked decision to become hostile.
ME1:
Presidium AI - responding to laws against AI's
Luna base VI - product of external tampering
ME2:
EDI - not hostile
Station VI - malfunction, due to faulty equipment
Rogue VI factory - malfunction due to faulty equipment
Project Overlord - An organic
ME3:
EVA - programmed by Illusive Man to be hostile
And from the overarcing story:
Geth - responding to hostility from an oppressor

Not one single instance supports the catalyst's claims. All of them are either immeterial to his assertion, or directly refute it.

[Ticonderoga117]

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet writing is subjective just like fan fiction while I don't hear outcries about space magic from Star Wars, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica.

Because it's usually explained, or is sensical, or the engineers in the series don't act like thier heads are full of lead.

But most of all, doesn't break the suspension of disbelief.

Modifié par Ticonderoga117, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:25 .

[Blueprotoss]

o Ventus wrote...

Raelen wrote...

You didnt need to use trick psychology.  I agree with you.  My comparison was faulty.  *Shrug*  Plus, I dont know how many people were highly educated about alien technologies from over 50,000 years ago.  

And no, I insinuated that explaining the science behind it, the intricacies of its functions or every little thing about it besides the most basic requirements for activating it might have not been pertinent.  I also insinuated a LOT of other possibilities which you completely disregarded.  Along with a few other points in my post.

@bold, Liara - protheans. 

I didn't disregard anything. I focused on that 1 particular point because it stood out to me the most. How the hell would the Crucible's functions NOT be a pertinent thing?

Yet Protheans were thought to be the most advanced race, which the Reapers aactually have that title.

[Blueprotoss]

daecath 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.

No, actually the geth/quarian conflict absolutely disproves the catalyst's assertion.

"The created will always rebel against their creators." At no point in any of the three games do we see a single example of a synthetic creation making the willful, unprovoked decision to become hostile.
ME1:
Presidium AI - responding to laws against AI's
Luna base VI - product of external tampering
ME2:
EDI - not hostile
Station VI - malfunction, due to faulty equipment
Rogue VI factory - malfunction due to faulty equipment
Project Overlord - An organic
ME3:
EVA - programmed by Illusive Man to be hostile
And from the overarcing story:
Geth - responding to hostility from an oppressor

Not one single instance supports the catalyst's claims. All of them are either immeterial to his assertion, or directly refute it.

Yet this is a straw-mann especially when Geth have killed Quarians and EDI/EVA have killed humans.

[o Ventus]

Eluril wrote...

No I disregard it because it sidesteps my entire argument which is 1. that other well known sci-fi series use "space magic" type things all the time and 2. even within Mass Effect there is all kinds of space magic besides Synthesis.

Again and again people point to the codex as the end all be all "this makes it SCIENCE!!" argument when in fact the in-game explanations (meaning dialogue IN THE GAME) is either minimal or non-existent for explaining various aspects in the game. A throwaway line of dialogue about "Oh this metal if subjected to a current let's everyone be an X-man for the day" is a-o-freaking-k but within the game a fairly extensive discussion by the Catalyst by IN-GAME standards about what synthesis is is just thrown aside because we can't read a few lines of small text in the Codex to make it "SCIENCE!!!"

and 3. The complaint "space magic" is meaningless geek babble. I'd much rather debate themes, characters, morality and the future of the galaxy than to get into a pointless geek debate about (heavy mouth breather) "It's not actually SCIENCE!!!"

It sidestepped nothing. You literally said "Explain to me how X works..." in the OP. that other person did it, I did it, various people did it. Never mind that your contstant drivel of "Oh, but other SciFi franchises have space magic too!" is completely missing the point and 100% irrelevant.

How is the Codex not an in-game explanation? You ever think that maybe the reason the characters don't go into elementary depth with the things they talk about is because the other characters they converse with are reasonably educated in the field?

You lose points for saying Synthesis is discussed "fairly extensively" by the Catalyst. 

If the complaints of space magic bother you, then why in the entire f**k did you make a thread about it? Are you a sick masochist?

[Raelen]

o Ventus wrote...

Raelen wrote...

You didnt need to use trick psychology.  I agree with you.  My comparison was faulty.  *Shrug*  Plus, I dont know how many people were highly educated about alien technologies from over 50,000 years ago.  

And no, I insinuated that explaining the science behind it, the intricacies of its functions or every little thing about it besides the most basic requirements for activating it might have not been pertinent.  I also insinuated a LOT of other possibilities which you completely disregarded.  Along with a few other points in my post.

@bold, Liara - protheans. 

I didn't disregard anything. I focused on that 1 particular point because it stood out to me the most. How the hell would the Crucible's functions NOT be a pertinent thing?

The crucible was the result of perhaps hundreds (as far as we know) of cycles contributing to and refining this thing...It's not as simple as saying Liara knew about the Protheans so she would know about all the cycles before hand (Which by the way she specifically states that there is little to NO data about the cycle before the Protheans...AND add to that the fact that she hardly turns out to be an expert.  In the very first time we meet her she MISTAKENLY activates her prison and can't find a way out. Plus almost all of her assumptions about the Protheans and even her own race's history and the Protheans involvement in it come out as blindly wrong.).

You want to use semantics as an argument?  Then focusing on one specific thing to the exclusion of others IS disregarding.

And yes, I do believe that including all the intricacies, all the science behind it, and all the very specific functions of the Crucible would NOT be extremely pertinent.  A person drives a car, I would challenge them to explain every single piece of it, it's function, what it's made of, why its necessary, how the combustion works down to the physics of it and mathematics of it...etc. 


*Ninja Edit*  I would like to ask, though, are people insisting that it is an impossibility that an advanced technology could be capable of doing something such as synthesis beyond the races in Mass Effects current understanding of their universe?  And I mean this regardless of the timing, or lack of preperation for  the introduction of the element.

Modifié par Raelen, 09 juillet 2012 - 04:31 .

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

so your lying to yourself then, cuz I read my comments and I said Sci-fi is built around a level of Science thats its called Science Fiction not Super Fantasy

so you need to stop putting words in people mouths and if you find this an insult I feel sorry for you

Yet you keep on lieing to make yourself look good based on personal beliefs instead of the facts.

[Eluril]

daecath 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.

No, actually the geth/quarian conflict absolutely disproves the catalyst's assertion.

"The created will always rebel against their creators." At no point in any of the three games do we see a single example of a synthetic creation making the willful, unprovoked decision to become hostile.
ME1:
Presidium AI - responding to laws against AI's
Luna base VI - product of external tampering
ME2:
EDI - not hostile
Station VI - malfunction, due to faulty equipment
Rogue VI factory - malfunction due to faulty equipment
Project Overlord - An organic
ME3:
EVA - programmed by Illusive Man to be hostile
And from the overarcing story:
Geth - responding to hostility from an oppressor

Not one single instance supports the catalyst's claims. All of them are either immeterial to his assertion, or directly refute it.

JSheppps thread on the Catalyst pieces your ideas apart

Also the real reason I like the Synthesis ending so much: The Music is just so damn gooooood!!!

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet writing is subjective just like fan fiction while I don't hear outcries about space magic from Star Wars, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica.

Because it's usually explained, or is sensical, or the engineers in the series don't act like thier heads are full of lead.

But most of all, doesn't break the suspension of disbelief.
 

Not by real science like the Force, Borg, or robots getting pregnant by humans.

[AresKeith]

Eluril wrote...

daecath 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.

No, actually the geth/quarian conflict absolutely disproves the catalyst's assertion.

"The created will always rebel against their creators." At no point in any of the three games do we see a single example of a synthetic creation making the willful, unprovoked decision to become hostile.
ME1:
Presidium AI - responding to laws against AI's
Luna base VI - product of external tampering
ME2:
EDI - not hostile
Station VI - malfunction, due to faulty equipment
Rogue VI factory - malfunction due to faulty equipment
Project Overlord - An organic
ME3:
EVA - programmed by Illusive Man to be hostile
And from the overarcing story:
Geth - responding to hostility from an oppressor

Not one single instance supports the catalyst's claims. All of them are either immeterial to his assertion, or directly refute it.

JSheppps thread on the Catalyst pieces your ideas apart

Also the real reason I like the Synthesis ending so much: The Music is just so damn gooooood!!!

I won't lie the music in the EC was good

[Eluril]

o Ventus wrote...

Eluril wrote...

No I disregard it because it sidesteps my entire argument which is 1. that other well known sci-fi series use "space magic" type things all the time and 2. even within Mass Effect there is all kinds of space magic besides Synthesis.

Again and again people point to the codex as the end all be all "this makes it SCIENCE!!" argument when in fact the in-game explanations (meaning dialogue IN THE GAME) is either minimal or non-existent for explaining various aspects in the game. A throwaway line of dialogue about "Oh this metal if subjected to a current let's everyone be an X-man for the day" is a-o-freaking-k but within the game a fairly extensive discussion by the Catalyst by IN-GAME standards about what synthesis is is just thrown aside because we can't read a few lines of small text in the Codex to make it "SCIENCE!!!"

and 3. The complaint "space magic" is meaningless geek babble. I'd much rather debate themes, characters, morality and the future of the galaxy than to get into a pointless geek debate about (heavy mouth breather) "It's not actually SCIENCE!!!"

It sidestepped nothing. You literally said "Explain to me how X works..." in the OP. that other person did it, I did it, various people did it. Never mind that your contstant drivel of "Oh, but other SciFi franchises have space magic too!" is completely missing the point and 100% irrelevant.

How is the Codex not an in-game explanation? You ever think that maybe the reason the characters don't go into elementary depth with the things they talk about is because the other characters they converse with are reasonably educated in the field?

You lose points for saying Synthesis is discussed "fairly extensively" by the Catalyst. 

If the complaints of space magic bother you, then why in the entire f**k did you make a thread about it? Are you a sick masochist?

As extensive as they could be within the game. There is no time afterwards where we can look at the codex. I'm kind of confused on that one, but it may be because the game actually ended....

I wish someone from Bioware would just come in here and slap the **** out of people with their explanations/Codex entries, but then what would you geeks complain about then?

Other sci-fi universes are 100% relevant to my comment because it wasn't "Explain to me the concept of how something works" it meant literally "Explain the technology that makes this happen". Because as far as I recall it the Catalyst pretty damn clearly explains: This energy will cause changes throughout all life synthetic and organic. It's some kind of cascading dark energy effect. To me no more implausible than X-men style biotics. I've said my piece now. Everyone tries to sidestep and cite a few lines of text from the Codex to make themselves feel smug and "hard sci-fi super hard serious sci-fi". It's repetitive so good night.

[Ticonderoga117]

Blueprotoss wrote...
Not by real science like the Force, Borg, or robots getting pregnant by humans.

The force in Star Wars is the franchise's "Phlebotinum". Same goes for Star Trek's dilithium, etc. It's part of the fiction in the science fiction.

The Borg? Seriously? Nano-tech man. That's hardly hard to explain with science. It's fiction because we can't quite do it ourselves... yet.

Those Cyclons aren't robots. They are more like clone bodies with implanted minds. The cloning we can do, and the general idea of mind transplantation is sciency with a good bit of fiction.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

so your lying to yourself then, cuz I read my comments and I said Sci-fi is built around a level of Science thats its called Science Fiction not Super Fantasy

so you need to stop putting words in people mouths and if you find this an insult I feel sorry for you

Yet you keep on lieing to make yourself look good based on personal beliefs instead of the facts.

lying because I quoted myself, just stop talking before I do insult you