503 réponses à ce sujet

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

But wait, what's that? We already have beaten Skynet and Cthulu? You don't say? Well, it wasn't as impossible as you thought.

How is that when Cthulu and Skynet are never killed.

Ticonderoga117 wrote... 

However, something better executed and made sense would also suffice. Sadly, the Crucible doesn't make sense. At all.

How is that when the Reapers themselves aren't fully explained.  Either way we're told from the beginning that the Crucible is a super weapon that nobody knows what it will do other then how to build it.  No matter what happened at the end some people would be mad.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 17 août 2012 - 06:16 .

[SackofCat]

I don't think that little boy in the intro is actually the catalyst...

[Krunjar]

Yeah it's funny when people say "it's not proper science fiction" when they encounter something that is less easily explainable in laymans terms. Eezo and biotics are no less space magic than the crucible and it's uses and as for the definition of science fiction and no one says anything has to play by your rules. And yes I am willing to enjoy reading about anything as long as it is interesting. But you know what i am done trying to argue intelligently.

Suck it all you "grounded in reality" drones I got the ending I wanted and there aint nuthin you can do about it. Don't enjoy your Mass Effect anymore awwr diddums cry me a river.

[noobcannon]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Because Mass Effect is Science Fiction, not Future Fantasy.

Star Trek, Star Wars, Warhammer: 40K, Too Human, Shadowrun, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy would like to talk to you.

Everything you quoted has established its own setting, rules, and framework - now of those that you mentioned, point out something that is analogous to going from an established framework, such as Eezo, to something of the magnitude of a green beam changing the DNA of every organic and synthetic in the galaxy ...

It doesn't matter if Q, the Force, normal magic, rampent robotic technolgy, more normal magic, more rampent robotic technolgy, and even more normal magic is involved.  Btw if you're talking about the magnitude of Synthes is then you also need to talk about Destroy and Control as well.

It DOES matter - and you're changing the argument, but yes I have a similar issue with Destroy and Control as well. 

Just like in ME while I'm surrised you haven't noticed with all that Element Zero going around.  All I see are contradictions and a soon to be pardox coming from you.

star wars fans are introduced to the force early on in star wars, not the last 5 minutes of return of the jedi while the death star is blowing up. that's why synthesis is labeled "space magic".

also i'm not sure "space magic" is a real word, so arguing over what is and what isn't space magic/fantasy/fiction seems irrelevant.

Modifié par noobcannon, 17 août 2012 - 06:29 .

[JBPBRC]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Synthesis was introduced by Saren in the beginning of ME1 and we all knew there would be a magical super weapon to kill the Reapers just like how Element Zero is the basis for magic in ME.

Uh, no.
Because that's stupid.

How is that unless if you wanted a conventional victory.  It would be asking a conventional victory against Skynet, Cthulu, or general Extinction.

Skynet was beaten conventionally, that's what started the whole time travel thing--to beat the Resistance via unconventional means.

[Krunjar]

noobcannon wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Because Mass Effect is Science Fiction, not Future Fantasy.

Star Trek, Star Wars, Warhammer: 40K, Too Human, Shadowrun, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy would like to talk to you.

Everything you quoted has established its own setting, rules, and framework - now of those that you mentioned, point out something that is analogous to going from an established framework, such as Eezo, to something of the magnitude of a green beam changing the DNA of every organic and synthetic in the galaxy ...

It doesn't matter if Q, the Force, normal magic, rampent robotic technolgy, more normal magic, more rampent robotic technolgy, and even more normal magic is involved.  Btw if you're talking about the magnitude of Synthes is then you also need to talk about Destroy and Control as well.

It DOES matter - and you're changing the argument, but yes I have a similar issue with Destroy and Control as well. 

Just like in ME while I'm surrised you haven't noticed with all that Element Zero going around.  All I see are contradictions and a soon to be pardox coming from you.

star wars fans are introduced to the force early on in star wars, not the last 5 minutes of return of the jedi while the death star is blowing up. that's why synthesis is labeled "space magic".

also i'm not sure "space magic" is a real word, so arguing over what is and what isn't space magic/fantasy/fiction seems irrelevant.

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

[Krunjar]

JBPBRC wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
Synthesis was introduced by Saren in the beginning of ME1 and we all knew there would be a magical super weapon to kill the Reapers just like how Element Zero is the basis for magic in ME.

Uh, no.
Because that's stupid.

How is that unless if you wanted a conventional victory.  It would be asking a conventional victory against Skynet, Cthulu, or general Extinction.

Skynet was beaten conventionally, that's what started the whole time travel thing--to beat the Resistance via unconventional means.

Convenient how you ignore good examples because one of them can be poked holes in. Argue the point don't attempt to reduce the argument to it's minutae

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 06:33 .

[SackofCat]

Um, Krunjar? Weren't you complaining about people insulting you? Haven't you called some of these people "bloody idiots" and now "drones"?

[UniqueName001]

Mcfly616 wrote...

UniqueName001 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I think everytime we get on this "unexplainable space magic" topic, all I really say is: well, what about The Force?

Which leads to a bunch of nonsensical answers dismissing it or excusing because of the context of the topic I'm bringing it up in.....basically I think people are simply mad about the space magic in ME is because they didn't want the game to end the way it did.....otherwise, space magic is completely understandable in any other sci fi story.....

Haha riiiight...

Yes, let's talk about The Force.

It's a power that is introduced in the very first movie.  It's use is, for the most part, consistent throughout those movies.

But it wouldn't make a bit of sense for it to show up in ME, nor would it make sense for element zero to show up in Star Wars; they are two different fictional universes with completely different baselines.  Merging them together would break suspension of disbelief, which is the basis of the "space magic" complaint in the first place.

who ever said anything about element zero in Star Wars....or the Force in ME? Wtf? Lol......no, my point was, people bash the endings of ME3 and blurt out Space magic in reference to Synthesis.....and I was simply pointing out that "The Force" isnt any less Space Magic than Synthesis is......nor is it any more explainable.....(and I could care less when it was introduced or how its used.....one cannot explain it....)

I could just go down the list of entries within the sci fi genre, and make countless observations of unexplained Space Magic(even less explained than Synthesis is).....and most of these "entries" are good stories....space magic and all

You ran screaming right past my point.  The Force makes sense in the Star Wars universe because it is part of the baseline.  If you were to insert it now into the Mass Effect universe, it would be just as much "space magic" as synthesis.

[Krunjar]

That was kinda the point.

If you can't beat em join em.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 06:38 .

[Memnon]

Krunjar wrote...

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

Incorrect. The general complaint about space magic is a strawman argument. The issue that many people have is when a story establishes a framework and rules in which to tell the story, and then deviates wildly from those guidelines.

UniqueName001 wrote...

You ran screaming right past my point.  The Force makes sense in the Star Wars universe because it is part of the baseline.  If you were to insert it now into the Mass Effect universe, it would be just as much "space magic" as synthesis.

Bingo ...

Modifié par Stornskar, 17 août 2012 - 06:39 .

[noobcannon]

Krunjar wrote...

noobcannon wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Because Mass Effect is Science Fiction, not Future Fantasy.

Star Trek, Star Wars, Warhammer: 40K, Too Human, Shadowrun, Deus Ex, and Final Fantasy would like to talk to you.

Everything you quoted has established its own setting, rules, and framework - now of those that you mentioned, point out something that is analogous to going from an established framework, such as Eezo, to something of the magnitude of a green beam changing the DNA of every organic and synthetic in the galaxy ...

It doesn't matter if Q, the Force, normal magic, rampent robotic technolgy, more normal magic, more rampent robotic technolgy, and even more normal magic is involved.  Btw if you're talking about the magnitude of Synthes is then you also need to talk about Destroy and Control as well.

It DOES matter - and you're changing the argument, but yes I have a similar issue with Destroy and Control as well. 

Just like in ME while I'm surrised you haven't noticed with all that Element Zero going around.  All I see are contradictions and a soon to be pardox coming from you.

star wars fans are introduced to the force early on in star wars, not the last 5 minutes of return of the jedi while the death star is blowing up. that's why synthesis is labeled "space magic".

also i'm not sure "space magic" is a real word, so arguing over what is and what isn't space magic/fantasy/fiction seems irrelevant.

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

the title of this thread is "why does everyone complain about space magic?", so i provided an answer.

[Krunjar]

Stornskar wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

Incorrect. The general complaint about space magic is a strawman argument. The issue that many people have is when a story establishes a framework and rules in which to tell the story, and then deviates wildly from those guidelines.

UniqueName001 wrote...

You ran screaming right past my point.  The Force makes sense in the Star Wars universe because it is part of the baseline.  If you were to insert it now into the Mass Effect universe, it would be just as much "space magic" as synthesis.

Bingo ...

And I already explained a long time ago that some people prefer it this way. We like surprise revalations. You don't and you don't have any right to say our preference is invalid. But you do, repeatedly and every time you do it's a veiled insult. Get over yourself.

@ Noobcannon gz on dodging the bullet because I made typed something wrong. But you still  basically said that the whole space magic/fantsy/sci fi thing is meaningless and that was the point of discussion. Which you dismissed out of hand. Try and be clever all you like you still did it.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 06:43 .

[noobcannon]

Krunjar wrote...

And I already explained a long time ago that some people prefer it this way. We like surprise revalations. You don't and you don't have any right to say our preference is invalid. But you do, repeatedly and every time you do it's a veiled insult. Get over yourself.

who is "we" and "our"?

[Krunjar]

Well I believe you would label us "pro enders" with a bareley disguised sneer.Were a rare breed on this forum now but I believe anti-enders are now well and truly the vocal minority. This forum is probably just about all that is left of you.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 06:47 .

[Memnon]

Krunjar wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

Incorrect. The general complaint about space magic is a strawman argument. The issue that many people have is when a story establishes a framework and rules in which to tell the story, and then deviates wildly from those guidelines.

UniqueName001 wrote...

You ran screaming right past my point.  The Force makes sense in the Star Wars universe because it is part of the baseline.  If you were to insert it now into the Mass Effect universe, it would be just as much "space magic" as synthesis.

Bingo ...

And I already explained a long time ago that some people prefer it this way. We like surprise revalations. You don't and you don't have any right to say our preference is invalid. But you do, repeatedly and every time you do it's a veiled insult. Get over yourself.

I've never said anything about you personally or your opinions. Everything I've stated I've always prefaced by "this is my opinion." I think a surprise revelation in the end is fine - a surprise revelation in the end that completely invaldiates/undermines the rules and framework established by the story is not

[Krunjar]

Stornskar wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Stornskar wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Congradulations the topic was about the definition "space magic" you just proved your just here to b*tch about the endings.

Incorrect. The general complaint about space magic is a strawman argument. The issue that many people have is when a story establishes a framework and rules in which to tell the story, and then deviates wildly from those guidelines.

UniqueName001 wrote...

You ran screaming right past my point.  The Force makes sense in the Star Wars universe because it is part of the baseline.  If you were to insert it now into the Mass Effect universe, it would be just as much "space magic" as synthesis.

Bingo ...

And I already explained a long time ago that some people prefer it this way. We like surprise revalations. You don't and you don't have any right to say our preference is invalid. But you do, repeatedly and every time you do it's a veiled insult. Get over yourself.

I've never said anything about you personally or your opinions. Everything I've stated I've always prefaced by "this is my opinion." I think a surprise revelation in the end is fine - a surprise revelation in the end that completely invaldiates/undermines the rules and framework established by the story is not

But it IS though according to my opinion. I love it when a series totally shakes things up at the end. You feel the jar as much as the main character and it's brilliant. But you can't seem to comprehend that.

I am not the only one who thinks this trouble is anyone who voices this opinion on this forum gets shouted down. And honestly I am just about out of patience too. Think this may be one of my last posts here on the BSN. Enjoy crying to the sky that mass effect didn't do everything the way you wanted it too.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 06:50 .

[noobcannon]

Krunjar wrote...

Well I believe you would label us "pro enders" with a bareley disguised sneer.

if you like the ending that is your preference. what you like about it is complelely up to you, and that's cool beans. i responded  to the original question in the title of the thread and gave a reason why i feel that way. i get the impression that because i don't like the same ending as you, i have some how ruined your day, so i am sorry for that. but there is no need for finger pointing and namecalling.

Modifié par noobcannon, 17 août 2012 - 06:53 .

[Krunjar]

noobcannon wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Well I believe you would label us "pro enders" with a bareley disguised sneer.

if you like the ending that is your preference. what you like about it is complelely up to you, and that's cool beans. i responded  to the original question in the title of the thread and gave a reason why i feel that way. i get the impression that because i don't like the same ending as you, i have some how ruined your day, so i am sorry for that. but there is no need for finger pointing and namecalling.

Sorry it would take alot more than you to ruin my day. But hell im done with BSN so you are free to stroke each other's ego's in peace.

[SackofCat]

Um, Krunjar? Are you arguing that Synthesis is not "magic in space" or that you do not care (or like?) that it is?

[noobcannon]

Krunjar wrote...

noobcannon wrote...

Krunjar wrote...

Well I believe you would label us "pro enders" with a bareley disguised sneer.

if you like the ending that is your preference. what you like about it is complelely up to you, and that's cool beans. i responded  to the original question in the title of the thread and gave a reason why i feel that way. i get the impression that because i don't like the same ending as you, i have some how ruined your day, so i am sorry for that. but there is no need for finger pointing and namecalling.

Sorry it would take alot more than you to ruin my day. But hell im done with BSN so you are free to stroke each other's ego's in peace.

i seriously do not understand why you want to pick a fight with me. i have said or done nothing to you except have a different opinion of the ending. if you're leaving bsn for good, hope it wasn't because of me and my "ego".

Modifié par noobcannon, 17 août 2012 - 06:56 .

[SackofCat]

It can be stressful for one (or a few) people to argue against many. Even a very smart person is almost always dumber than 20 less smart people. I am not referring to anyone specific or judging anyone's intelligence with this statement.

[Krunjar]

Look I don't object to differing opinions what I object to is the invalidation of other peoples opinions. Usually by references to genre definitions (I remember when genre busting was a GOOD thing) or by coining phrases like space magic and suddenly becoming professional literary critics citing plot holes and bad writing.

Honestly mass effect has been bad writing plot holes and space magic right from the start if anyone has eyes to see. What I object isn't having the opinion it's the so called "evidence" they bring up to support their claim.

Calls to genre definition - meaningless
Calls to scientific theory - also meaningless in fiction.
Calls to literary failure on the part of the writers - also meaningless given previous material.

Mass Effect has always been cheap sci fi candy that draws heavily from star trekky socially friendly elements in order to appeal to a wide audience now all of a sudden in my opinion they did something daring with the ending and turned that universe on it's head I and many others I know thought that was a pure masterstroke.

If someone simply said to me. I didn't really like the ending of mass effect or even I hated it. That I could get behind but all this citing of plot holes and space magic is just insulting. It's insulting my intelligence with every step by pretending that this hasn't all been done in the series before. Yes they changed the rules at the last minute but that is a literary decision subject to divided opinion. But that is not respected by those who repeatedly call to the things I said above they don't want to just say they don't like the ending they want to invalidate it with some kind of evidential argument and that is what I just can not stand.

To give a popular example, Star Wars I and I think alot of others preferred the force when it was this transcendental unexplainable property of life in the universe. When all of a sudden it was caused by bacteria in a half assed attempt to explain itself scientifically it immidiately became a lame pandering to the currently accepted limits of what is possible in the universe. I like, nay love the acknowledgement that we don't know and can't understand everything in the universe it's far more reasonable than the arrogant assumption that we somehow know the limits of the possible.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 07:19 .

[SackofCat]

The problem for many is not that it was space magic. It is the scale of the space magic. It ruins their immersion.

Imagine if in the end, Shepard met God and God fixed all problems. That is an exaggerated version of what happened for some people.

[Krunjar]

SackofCat wrote...

The problem for many is not that it was space magic. It is the scale of the space magic. It ruins their immersion.

Imagine if in the end, Shepard met God and God fixed all problems. That is an exaggerated version of what happened for some people.

Yes I understand that opinion and I perfectly respect it. But can't you  see that it is just an opinion? It is a matter of peoples perspective and some peoples perspective on the ending was different from others to give you an example I will give you mine.

I see the final  meeting with the catalyst as a great triumph of organic and synthetic life. An arena where in  moments the avatars of both forms of life sit down and find a way to end the cycles for good. The catalyst in my opinion behaves as utterly selflessly as shepard ever did. Facing the probable end of his own existance and the possible end of everything he ever worked for. He allows Shepard a fallible being just like him to choose, Because he wants the cycles to end. But as he said can't make them happen. Nothing he does in my opinion marks him as "god like" transcendental maybe but not divine. Sure not everything is explained but I would not want nor appreciate an explanation of every nook and cranny of this ending. Leaving some things to my interpretation is much appreciated and there are many logical ways his actions can be explained this has been done in great length by those such as Jshepp and if you like you can look up their topics if you would like to read more. In my opinion alot of people see the hologram of the child and immidiately go "god image" but I don't think that's fair or accurate.

The end of ME is the avatars of synthetic and organic life facing their end together to create the future. And to me that was an augustly beautiful way to end the series.

That is of course my opinion and only a summarised version of what I think  of the catalyst and the ending. To provide you with the totality of the reason I like the ending I would have to write an essay and I don't think anyone wants me to do that. But I think you get the general flavor from what I wrote above.

Modifié par Krunjar, 17 août 2012 - 07:46 .