661 réponses à ce sujet

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
 You really aren't a science fiction fan.

A codex entry doesn't change whats magic or not even when biotic powers is magic.

Well it seems like I have read more Science Fiction than you have and understand what makes good SciFi compared to "Ah, to hell with it. Make crap up for no reason!"

And yes it does.

If thats true then you wouldn't be mad or complain about space magic.

[CaliGuy033]

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Thats a huge straw-mann.

It's ironic that you mention straw man, because that's what this entire discussion is. For the most part, people are upset that Synthesis is not congruent with the rules established in the series, not that it's 'space magic.' Any fantasy and science fiction can establish its own set of rules (Vampires burst into flames in sunlight?) and as long as they stick to those rules, people can suspend their disbeleif. If a fantasy/sci fi setting establishes rules, then pulls something completely out of nowhere which doesn't have anything to do with the rules ... that is where the disconnect is. Seriously, why are folks unable to get this? 

Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

um do you? Science Fiction just because its fiction doesn't mean it should throw out the sciene part, a green wave that changes everything in the galaxy destroys Sci-fi and goes to fantasy

Yet you forget that ME is still mostly magic based especially you also look at all of Control and up to a degree of Destroy.

[Ticonderoga117]

Blueprotoss wrote...
If thats true then you wouldn't be mad or complain about space magic.

Except Synthesis is the later, not the former, and IT MAKES NO SENSE.

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
If thats true then you wouldn't be mad or complain about space magic.

Except Synthesis is the later, not the former, and IT MAKES NO SENSE.

Yet Synthesis has been around since Saren and didn't come out of the blue at the end of ME3.

[Reorte]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

It certainly doesn't appear to have any grounding in either what we know is possible in reality or any of the effects we've seen from element zero. Where's the explanation that it is congruent with the rules established in the series? The onus of proof lies there if you want it taken seriously.

[Reorte]

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet Synthesis has been around since Saren and didn't come out of the blue at the end of ME3.

Saren got a load of implants. That's rather different.

[Ticonderoga117]

CaliGuy033 wrote...
Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

Because no where else in the series has a piece of tech capable of doing what Synthesis does (Make husks on a galatic level) ever shown.

It's a contrivience made by the writers to fulfill some BS "high-brow" ending.

That is why.

[CaliGuy033]

People continue to draw a false distinction between "science fiction" and "fantasy." They're different literary genres that usually involve different settings and time periods, but the storytelling mechanisms are identical. "Here is some made up stuff that doesn't exist in real life. Take it or leave it."

Just because science fiction tends to offer a pseudo-scientific explanation doesn't make it any more realistic. Offer all the "scientific" explanations you want--changing the mass of an object is just as much fantasy as wizards and goblins.

[Blueprotoss]

Reorte wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

It certainly doesn't appear to have any grounding in either what we know is possible in reality or any of the effects we've seen from element zero. Where's the explanation that it is congruent with the rules established in the series? The onus of proof lies there if you want it taken seriously.

Yet it doesn't matter whats in or out of the codex based on how ME is mostly based on magic especially when we're talking about Element Zero.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

um do you? Science Fiction just because its fiction doesn't mean it should throw out the sciene part, a green wave that changes everything in the galaxy destroys Sci-fi and goes to fantasy

Yet you forget that ME is still mostly magic based especially you also look at all of Control and up to a degree of Destroy.

well control makes Shepard take the Starbrats place and sends out a wave takes control and Destroy is basically a Reaper tech EMP bomb, both which has been done before, your point?

[Blueprotoss]

Reorte wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet Synthesis has been around since Saren and didn't come out of the blue at the end of ME3.

Saren got a load of implants. That's rather different.

Yet he still went through Synthesis and he was actually rebuilt.

[Reorte]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

People continue to draw a false distinction between "science fiction" and "fantasy." They're different literary genres that usually involve different settings and time periods, but the storytelling mechanisms are identical. "Here is some made up stuff that doesn't exist in real life. Take it or leave it."

Just because science fiction tends to offer a pseudo-scientific explanation doesn't make it any more realistic. Offer all the "scientific" explanations you want--changing the mass of an object is just as much fantasy as wizards and goblins.

That's true of the soft end of it (which ME leans towards). Hard sci-fi sticks rigidly withing the laws of science, even if it involves things that we've not got a clue how to actually build, but those are engineering and not science issues. Good fantasy doesn't pull major new magic out of thin air late in the day either.

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...
Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

Because no where else in the series has a piece of tech capable of doing what Synthesis does (Make husks on a galatic level) ever shown.

It's a contrivience made by the writers to fulfill some BS "high-brow" ending.

That is why.

Yet we aren't given "science" behind the Reapers.

[Reorte]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet Synthesis has been around since Saren and didn't come out of the blue at the end of ME3.

Saren got a load of implants. That's rather different.

Yet he still went through Synthesis and he was actually rebuilt.

There's no reason given to think that what was done to Saren bares any resemblence to what happens in Synthesis.

[CaliGuy033]

Reorte wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Nobody has ever come anywhere close to explaining cogently why Synthesis is not "congruent with the rules established in the series."  Instead, people continue to offer bizarre half-measure arguments that typically translate to, 'I think Synthesis is stupid, so here's an imagined reason or two why it 'doesn't fit with the rules.'"

It certainly doesn't appear to have any grounding in either what we know is possible in reality or any of the effects we've seen from element zero. Where's the explanation that it is congruent with the rules established in the series? The onus of proof lies there if you want it taken seriously.

In a universe based entirely on constantly violating the most fundamental law of physics, anything is consistent with the rules.  

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

um do you? Science Fiction just because its fiction doesn't mean it should throw out the sciene part, a green wave that changes everything in the galaxy destroys Sci-fi and goes to fantasy

Yet you forget that ME is still mostly magic based especially you also look at all of Control and up to a degree of Destroy.

well control makes Shepard take the Starbrats place and sends out a wave takes control and Destroy is basically a Reaper tech EMP bomb, both which has been done before, your point?

Yet you're still contradicting yourself especially when Synthesis has been done before and an EMP would have killed everyone.

[CaliGuy033]

Reorte wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

People continue to draw a false distinction between "science fiction" and "fantasy." They're different literary genres that usually involve different settings and time periods, but the storytelling mechanisms are identical. "Here is some made up stuff that doesn't exist in real life. Take it or leave it."

Just because science fiction tends to offer a pseudo-scientific explanation doesn't make it any more realistic. Offer all the "scientific" explanations you want--changing the mass of an object is just as much fantasy as wizards and goblins.

That's true of the soft end of it (which ME leans towards). Hard sci-fi sticks rigidly withing the laws of science, even if it involves things that we've not got a clue how to actually build, but those are engineering and not science issues. Good fantasy doesn't pull major new magic out of thin air late in the day either.

That may be true, but if that's the case, then Mass Effect is not "hard" sci-fi, and wasn't hard sci-fi from a few minutes into the first game.

[Blueprotoss]

Reorte wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Yet Synthesis has been around since Saren and didn't come out of the blue at the end of ME3.

Saren got a load of implants. That's rather different.

Yet he still went through Synthesis and he was actually rebuilt.

There's no reason given to think that what was done to Saren bares any resemblence to what happens in Synthesis.

Yet thats what Reapers do.

[Ownedbacon]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

In the hope that this thread is not beyond redemption...

Look, when you are introduced to a sci-fi universe, you need accept certain deviations from reality in order to make the universe interesting (remember, science fiction). in Mass Effect,s case, this means, well, the the titular effect. Eezo can alter the mass of an object when going through an electric current. There's lots of technical sounding mumbo-jumbo behind it, but the gist of it is that this phlebotinum allows you to say ''screw Newton'' and go faster than light while lifting people with you mind and all that assorted jazz. It's accepted by the viewer because the entire universe is based on it; they didn't name the series after it for nothing. ME is hardly the only sci-fi franchise to use such things; in fact, as far as soft-hard scifi goes, it's probably closer to the middle, going a bit softer as the series progresses (Project Lazarus...). But mostly everything is explained in-universe, Biotics get several Codex pages, as does space travel, its implications and its limitations. It's not space magic because it doesn't just happen; there's a detailled explanation behind it and it may seem ridiculous at times, but again, science fiction.

Synthesis, however, just happens. All we know is that Shepard's ''energy'' will be ''dispersed'' in order to ''combine organics and synthetics into a new DNA''. And it will do this to the whole galaxy, trillions upon trillions of life-forms, instantly. That's all the explanation we ever get. I gave all the available explanation for synthesis in two lines. For a series that at least tried to be consistent and generally grounded itself into (soft) science, that's way out there. We can theorize how Destroy works (sort of an EMP pulse that disables synthetics, nothing out of place), we can understsnd how Control works (flip a switch, Shepard is the new manager, orders Reapers to begin their galactic community service at once) but Synthesis is  a feat of technology that seems far beyond the rest. Affecting all the Reapers (easy, there's what a couple thousand of them? Cerberus themselves were making progress on that front) or all the synthetic life-forms in the galaxy (there aren't too many, and they all have Reaper code for easier tracking, hell maybe that's why EDI and the Geth absolutely have to be destroyed) is one thing, but every living being in the galaxy? Changing them to the very molecule without any sort of known side effect and making them perfect peace-lovers who glow green instantly? That's a whole another scale. It breaks the rules of the universe by virtue of just being too much, not being explained, and not seeming to belong into the technical limitations and established themes of the universe. Being able to bend mass with a specific fictional element does not mean that a radical change down to the very atom of each and every being in the galaxy instantly and harmlessly is acceptable, period.

An analogy; take Fallout. It has magical radiation that does all sort of things, from making scorpions huge and aggressive to turning humans into very long lived, cancer-ridden Ghouls. It has portable laser and plasma weapons (which is very high tech even in the ME universe). It has all sorts of implausible science-y stuff, culminating with a person being separated from their brain and still living, to the point of being able to hold a conversation with it. Why? 50's Science! meets Rule of Fun/Funny. It's how the universe has worked since day 1, and it's accepted as being part of the setting. That does not mean that anything goes, however,; if Gandalf suddendly appeared and cast a spell that make the Earth radiant and beautiful again and brainwashed every Raider out there to hug fluffy bunnies and offer cookies to passing folks, fans would call bull****. Why? It's not less implausible than having a chat with you very own disembodied brain. But it comes out of nowhere, is not even explained one tiny bit, and it generally ruins the setting.

That's why it's viewed as space magic. Not only because it's implausible/impossible, but because it doesn't fit the setting at all. If this was 2001: A Space Odyssey (which was only hard sci-fi when it wanted to, the rest was pure fantasy) or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy or another piece of non-serious or utterly esoteric sci-fi, Synthesis would pass as normal. In a setting that at least tries to take itself seriously, it just utterly wrecks the willing suspension of disbelief.



TLDR: It's not only that it's implausible, it's that it doesn't fit the universe and comes completely out of left field to radically alter the plot and the very fabric of the setting.

this

[savionen]

CaliGuy033 wrote...

People continue to draw a false distinction between "science fiction" and "fantasy." They're different literary genres that usually involve different settings and time periods, but the storytelling mechanisms are identical. "Here is some made up stuff that doesn't exist in real life. Take it or leave it."

Just because science fiction tends to offer a pseudo-scientific explanation doesn't make it any more realistic. Offer all the "scientific" explanations you want--changing the mass of an object is just as much fantasy as wizards and goblins.

That obviously doesn't make synthesis any more palatable for most people.

[Reorte]

CaliGuy033 wrote...
In a universe based entirely on constantly violating the most fundamental law of physics, anything is consistent with the rules. 

OK then, explain how it can be achieved using the violations of the laws of physics that the mass effect is known to have.

[elitehunter34]

I don't even know what the purpose of this thread is anymore. Look, we get it, biotics, eezo, and mass effect fields are all space magic in that they aren't possible with current technology. But that isn't why people call Synthesis space magic. People call it space magic (or at least I do) because it breaks our suspension of disbelief. This has been said by several people in this thread.

No one is trying to argue that biotics and mass effect fields are realistic or possible. We are saying that they have been established early in the series and have known effects and limitations based on the codex and the rest of the Mass Effect universe. That's why they don't break my suspension of disbelief. If all of a sudden some guy destroyed a planet with biotics, that would break my suspension of disbelief because biotics are not established to be that godly powerful anywhere else in the series.

Synthesis breaks my suspension of disbelief for many reasons. For one, it is suddenly altering every organic being in the galaxy on a molecular level. It just doesn't make sense to me how a device could feasibly do that. Just because a device is powerful doesn't mean it can do some so complex. How would an energy wave give someone synthetic upgrades? That is presumably creating complex systems with intricate parts and merging them with complex biological systems. I'm sorry, but no where in the Mass Effect universe can an energy wave somehow create matter in an organized way.

It also gives synthetics full understanding of organics. What does that even mean? Is it altering their programming? Giving them new hardware? How advanced does the synthetic have to be for this effect to happen?  Will a simple computer gain this "full understanding"? An attack drone? An omni-tool? The description is just too vague and unspecific for it to even mean anything.

And my personal top reason for why Synthesis breaks my suspension of disbelief is the necessary sacrifice of Shepard for it to work. It disperses Shepard's organic energy? What? What the hell is "organic energy"? Nothing like that exists in the Mass Effect universe. Why does it need Shepard in the first place? The Synthesis beam is already silly enough, adding the Shepard sacrifice just put the final nail in the coffin for me.

Modifié par elitehunter34, 09 juillet 2012 - 05:02 .

[Blueprotoss]

Ownedbacon wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

In the hope that this thread is not beyond redemption...

Look, when you are introduced to a sci-fi universe, you need accept certain deviations from reality in order to make the universe interesting (remember, science fiction). in Mass Effect,s case, this means, well, the the titular effect. Eezo can alter the mass of an object when going through an electric current. There's lots of technical sounding mumbo-jumbo behind it, but the gist of it is that this phlebotinum allows you to say ''screw Newton'' and go faster than light while lifting people with you mind and all that assorted jazz. It's accepted by the viewer because the entire universe is based on it; they didn't name the series after it for nothing. ME is hardly the only sci-fi franchise to use such things; in fact, as far as soft-hard scifi goes, it's probably closer to the middle, going a bit softer as the series progresses (Project Lazarus...). But mostly everything is explained in-universe, Biotics get several Codex pages, as does space travel, its implications and its limitations. It's not space magic because it doesn't just happen; there's a detailled explanation behind it and it may seem ridiculous at times, but again, science fiction.

Synthesis, however, just happens. All we know is that Shepard's ''energy'' will be ''dispersed'' in order to ''combine organics and synthetics into a new DNA''. And it will do this to the whole galaxy, trillions upon trillions of life-forms, instantly. That's all the explanation we ever get. I gave all the available explanation for synthesis in two lines. For a series that at least tried to be consistent and generally grounded itself into (soft) science, that's way out there. We can theorize how Destroy works (sort of an EMP pulse that disables synthetics, nothing out of place), we can understsnd how Control works (flip a switch, Shepard is the new manager, orders Reapers to begin their galactic community service at once) but Synthesis is  a feat of technology that seems far beyond the rest. Affecting all the Reapers (easy, there's what a couple thousand of them? Cerberus themselves were making progress on that front) or all the synthetic life-forms in the galaxy (there aren't too many, and they all have Reaper code for easier tracking, hell maybe that's why EDI and the Geth absolutely have to be destroyed) is one thing, but every living being in the galaxy? Changing them to the very molecule without any sort of known side effect and making them perfect peace-lovers who glow green instantly? That's a whole another scale. It breaks the rules of the universe by virtue of just being too much, not being explained, and not seeming to belong into the technical limitations and established themes of the universe. Being able to bend mass with a specific fictional element does not mean that a radical change down to the very atom of each and every being in the galaxy instantly and harmlessly is acceptable, period.

An analogy; take Fallout. It has magical radiation that does all sort of things, from making scorpions huge and aggressive to turning humans into very long lived, cancer-ridden Ghouls. It has portable laser and plasma weapons (which is very high tech even in the ME universe). It has all sorts of implausible science-y stuff, culminating with a person being separated from their brain and still living, to the point of being able to hold a conversation with it. Why? 50's Science! meets Rule of Fun/Funny. It's how the universe has worked since day 1, and it's accepted as being part of the setting. That does not mean that anything goes, however,; if Gandalf suddendly appeared and cast a spell that make the Earth radiant and beautiful again and brainwashed every Raider out there to hug fluffy bunnies and offer cookies to passing folks, fans would call bull****. Why? It's not less implausible than having a chat with you very own disembodied brain. But it comes out of nowhere, is not even explained one tiny bit, and it generally ruins the setting.

That's why it's viewed as space magic. Not only because it's implausible/impossible, but because it doesn't fit the setting at all. If this was 2001: A Space Odyssey (which was only hard sci-fi when it wanted to, the rest was pure fantasy) or The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy or another piece of non-serious or utterly esoteric sci-fi, Synthesis would pass as normal. In a setting that at least tries to take itself seriously, it just utterly wrecks the willing suspension of disbelief.



TLDR: It's not only that it's implausible, it's that it doesn't fit the universe and comes completely out of left field to radically alter the plot and the very fabric of the setting.

this

Yet all of that is still magic.

[Blueprotoss]

Reorte wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...
In a universe based entirely on constantly violating the most fundamental law of physics, anything is consistent with the rules. 

OK then, explain how it can be achieved using the violations of the laws of physics that the mass effect is known to have.

Element Zero and anything based on Mass Relay tech.