661 réponses à ce sujet

[NoUserNameHere]

As of the extended cut, Synthesis is doing whatever it needs to do to make the happiest ending possible. If that's not blatant space magic (plotkai, asspulls, writer fiat, plot no jutsu. Whatever you want to call it) what does qualify?

[Blueprotoss]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Control: Reapers are machines. One can control machines.
Destroy: targeted EMP sort of thing
Synthesis: mixes organic and synthetic DNA. Except synthetics don't have DNA. WTF?

If one's space magic then all are 3 space magic.

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Eluril wrote...
Lack of foreshadowing is a different argument. Again, what I'm saying is that Science fiction is supposed to be about technology beyond our comprehension. Therefore it is stupid from the perspective of a science fiction setting to label certain things "space magic" and unacceptable as long as they are given an adequate level of explanation in the setting. You really believe if there was "post-game" content that bioware wouldn't have all kinds of codex entries ready to go to explain it at least at the level of biotics?

How? Mass Effect has explained how it's technologies work. Bull**** in real life? Yes. But they were explained and grounded as rules within the universe. Synthesis is out of the blue nonsense. It effects the galaxy on a massive scale.
And I have no idea what Bioware will or will not do.

You should tell Saren that.

Saren never pushed for Synthesis.

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Control: Reapers are machines. One can control machines.
Destroy: targeted EMP sort of thing
Synthesis: mixes organic and synthetic DNA. Except synthetics don't have DNA. WTF?

If one's space magic then all are 3 space magic.

You aren't even trying to troll anymore, are you?

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

@Blueprotoss if you think its time to move on then gtfo

Yet I'm not the one complaining here or being childish.

your the one comparing Mass Effect sci-fi to real life and telling people in a thread for talking about ME3 to move on, do you know how stupid that makes you look?

[Blueprotoss]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote... 

None of those are introduced at the conclusion of the series with absolutely no exposition and cause a galaxy wide change.

I guess you missed the introduction of the Reapers and the Citadel. 

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Both the Reapers and Citadel were introduced in ME1.

Yet you said there was no explaination at the end of ME3.

I'm talking about synthesis. 

Talk to Saren.

[Tealjaker94]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Control: Reapers are machines. One can control machines.
Destroy: targeted EMP sort of thing
Synthesis: mixes organic and synthetic DNA. Except synthetics don't have DNA. WTF?

If one's space magic then all are 3 space magic.

That argument doesn't even make sense.

[Heeden]

daaaav wrote...
Our argument is that synthesis (and plot devices like it) trivialize the mass effect universe and it's established limitations. You could replace the synthesis beam with a giant mutant space goat that somehow achieved the same end and it would fit just as well as synthesis...

No-one would dare try to use a mutant space goat for anything, those things eat planets.

[Krunjar]

Eluril wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Eluril wrote...

What do you mean by "explained"? A few lines in a codex or a few lines of dialogue were more than enough to explain how it works in the universe. I'm perfectly happy with that. What I am getting at is that people focus on things being "explained" in the universe as if it needs to have to be diagrammed exactly how it would work. That's not science fiction, that's a scientific colloquium.

And Ridley Scott should be praised for having the balls to use visuals to tell as much of his story as he can in Prometheus. And care to debate me on whether Prometheus is better than Alien 3 or Alien Resurrection?

"Explained" as in they are the established as rules in the universe. Biotics, guns that fire shards of metal and faster than light travel are all possible. We have nothing to suggest Synthesis is plausible nevermind possible. Introducing such unbelievable tech without any explanation or foreshadowing is stupid.

Never seen Alien 3 or Resurrection though I've heard I'm not missing much. And story is one thing. Moronic characters is another.

Lack of foreshadowing is a different argument. Again, what I'm saying is that Science fiction is supposed to be about technology beyond our comprehension. Therefore it is stupid from the perspective of a science fiction setting to label certain things "space magic" and unacceptable as long as they are given an adequate level of explanation in the setting. You really believe if there was "post-game" content that bioware wouldn't have all kinds of codex entries ready to go to explain it at least at the level of biotics?

I agree with this compleley. People are too quick to shout space magic when space magic is the frikkin POINT. And just because a plot device comes out of nowhere does not automatically make it bad. Lots of amatuer designers here who think they could do it better. Off you go then I will let you know if it sucks when you're done.

[AresKeith]

NoUserNameHere wrote...

As of the extended cut, Synthesis is doing whatever it needs to do to make the happiest ending possible. If that's not blatant space magic (plotkai, asspulls, writer fiat, plot no jutsu. Whatever you want to call it) what does qualify?

don't forget bringing the dead back to life

[Tealjaker94]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Both the Reapers and Citadel were introduced in ME1.

Yet you said there was no explaination at the end of ME3.

I'm talking about synthesis. 

Talk to Saren.

Saren was implanted. He never changed his genetic structure.

[o Ventus]

Krunjar wrote...

Eluril wrote...

legion999 wrote...

Eluril wrote...

What do you mean by "explained"? A few lines in a codex or a few lines of dialogue were more than enough to explain how it works in the universe. I'm perfectly happy with that. What I am getting at is that people focus on things being "explained" in the universe as if it needs to have to be diagrammed exactly how it would work. That's not science fiction, that's a scientific colloquium.

And Ridley Scott should be praised for having the balls to use visuals to tell as much of his story as he can in Prometheus. And care to debate me on whether Prometheus is better than Alien 3 or Alien Resurrection?

"Explained" as in they are the established as rules in the universe. Biotics, guns that fire shards of metal and faster than light travel are all possible. We have nothing to suggest Synthesis is plausible nevermind possible. Introducing such unbelievable tech without any explanation or foreshadowing is stupid.

Never seen Alien 3 or Resurrection though I've heard I'm not missing much. And story is one thing. Moronic characters is another.

Lack of foreshadowing is a different argument. Again, what I'm saying is that Science fiction is supposed to be about technology beyond our comprehension. Therefore it is stupid from the perspective of a science fiction setting to label certain things "space magic" and unacceptable as long as they are given an adequate level of explanation in the setting. You really believe if there was "post-game" content that bioware wouldn't have all kinds of codex entries ready to go to explain it at least at the level of biotics?

I agree with this compleley. People are too quick to shout space magic when space magic is the frikkin POINT. And just because a plot device comes out of nowhere does not automatically make it bad. Lots of amatuer designers here who think they could do it better. Off you go then I will let you know if it sucks when you're done.

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.

[Wayning_Star]

space magic is basicly new speak about sci fi technical adherence. The term is used mostly as buzzwords for those that don't really want to imagine stuff, or don't want the imagined stuff in their version of sci fi story tellings. Unfortunately, all sci fi is space magic of different levels. Heck, even standing science fact is constantly being peer grouped and challanged, especially by the reality we face every day. So when I see the words used as or in some hope contemporary criticism, I take it with a grain of salt as writing magic..oh, wait?!?, is writing magic actually a term?
or maybe reading magic...

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 09 juillet 2012 - 02:40 .

[Heeden]

AresKeith wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

As of the extended cut, Synthesis is doing whatever it needs to do to make the happiest ending possible. If that's not blatant space magic (plotkai, asspulls, writer fiat, plot no jutsu. Whatever you want to call it) what does qualify?

don't forget bringing the dead back to life

One more for the OP - Project Lazarus is magic.

[xsdob]

Artifical gravity is also space magic, the only sci-fi thing to ever cover it in a logical and non-magic way was 2001 a space oddesy, as far as my knowledge goes.

[o Ventus]

Heeden wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

As of the extended cut, Synthesis is doing whatever it needs to do to make the happiest ending possible. If that's not blatant space magic (plotkai, asspulls, writer fiat, plot no jutsu. Whatever you want to call it) what does qualify?

don't forget bringing the dead back to life

One more for the OP - Project Lazarus is magic.

Lazarus is never explained. It isn't hard science nor is it magic, based from the dialogue stated about how improbable it is in-universe. It's just a bad plot device.

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

@Blueprotoss if you think its time to move on then gtfo

Yet I'm not the one complaining here or being childish.

your the one comparing Mass Effect sci-fi to real life and telling people in a thread for talking about ME3 to move on, do you know how stupid that makes you look?

There's a lot space magic in ME and a prime example is a biotic.

[o Ventus]

xsdob wrote...

Artifical gravity is also space magic, the only sci-fi thing to ever cover it in a logical and non-magic way was 2001 a space oddesy, as far as my knowledge goes.

Nice self contradiction there.

[2Shepards]

As everyone has glaringly pointed out, please refer to your Codex, we all got one.

Secondly and more importantly when we enter the series as a player almost everything you mention is a given in the ME universe, you either suspend your disbelief or not. You either read up the codex or not. However what rips you right out of this mindset that this is all possible is a character introduced in the final ten minutes of the game just to tell you


Nahh nahhh na na nahhhhhhhhhh

[Blueprotoss]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Both the Reapers and Citadel were introduced in ME1.

Yet you said there was no explaination at the end of ME3.

I'm talking about synthesis. 

Talk to Saren.

Saren was implanted. He never changed his genetic structure.

Yet Saren is the prime example of Synthesis.

[Heeden]

xsdob wrote...

Artifical gravity is also space magic, the only sci-fi thing to ever cover it in a logical and non-magic way was 2001 a space oddesy, as far as my knowledge goes.

Didn't they use spin?

Quite a few sci-fi things do that including Babylon 5 (the inspiration for the Citadel) although they also had space-magic gravity.

Actually, doesn't the Citadel generate "gravity" in a realistic way?

[xsdob]

o Ventus wrote...

xsdob wrote...

Artifical gravity is also space magic, the only sci-fi thing to ever cover it in a logical and non-magic way was 2001 a space oddesy, as far as my knowledge goes.

Nice self contradiction there.

They had them walking on the stations walls, this is how it would need to be so the rotational force could keep them in place, everything would need to be built so that the sides are the floor.

Every other sci-fi that I've seen does not do this or have this design, how do they stay planted.

[Tealjaker94]

xsdob wrote...

Artifical gravity is also space magic, the only sci-fi thing to ever cover it in a logical and non-magic way was 2001 a space oddesy, as far as my knowledge goes.

Mass effect fields. They're a pretty vital part of the universe. Hence the title of all 3 games.

[o Ventus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Both the Reapers and Citadel were introduced in ME1.

Yet you said there was no explaination at the end of ME3.

I'm talking about synthesis. 

Talk to Saren.

Saren was implanted. He never changed his genetic structure.

Yet Saren is the prime example of Synthesis.

No.

He.

Isn't.

[daaaav]

Heeden wrote...

daaaav wrote...

Synthesis shatters WILLING suspension of disbelief.

It's that simple. Even if it could be explained with dozens of codex entries it won't change the fact that when synthesis was introduced , all a i felt was 'well that's just stupid'.

Of course all the things in your list are rendered 'impossible' by our current understanding of the universe. It doesn't really matter because the game world is built around these concepts and largely adheres to certain rules.

Synthesis doesn't.

"Well that's just stupid" is exactly what I though about eezo. So I accepted it was basically mithril/unobtainium and the whole +ve charge = more mass, -ve charge = less mass deal. The application for artificial-gravity was iffy, the FTL system was laughable and with biotics I realised science had pretty much taken a holiday and we could expect as much magic as we get in something like Dune.

They did mix in some harder sci-fi concepts but very early on they set the bar for technology pretty much being limited only by imagination.

I'm not a particle physicist so I can't say I really thought a whole lot about how eezo works. The point is that we know what it does in Mass Effect and that the characters know what it can do. It powers the relays and is somehow involved in Biotics. It's like the "spice" of Dune, except Dune gets really pseudo scientific and fuzzy with what folks can do with spice.

What didn't occur in Mass Effect was that when faced with a problem, a character didn't just say "No worries, I'll tie some eezo to this baboon here and that blah blah etc etc".