706 réponses à ce sujet

[Dr_Extrem]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

Correct. That's why Jakob may have to explain what Cerberus is, even though Shepard have experience with them in the past. 

Right, but the important part of Ieldra's post is that every second that passes more info is lost. Based on the Liara comic, we aren't talking about seconds after Shepard's death so much as hours and days before the revival process begins. In order then for the LP to be considered scientifically feasible, we'd have to assume that the brain can somehow retain the information in other ways unmeasurable by our current RL technology.

Now, that's not impossible, considering no one in current science can really claim to know the brain, but it does posit something other than what we currently know about the brain.

but we know enough to say, that a dead brain is dead and the information is lost after several minutes without oxygen.

lost information is lost .. and lost functions are lost as well.

[Sejborg]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

Correct. That's why Jakob may have to explain what Cerberus is, even though Shepard have experience with them in the past. 

Right, but the important part of Ieldra's post is that every second that passes more info is lost. Based on the Liara comic, we aren't talking about seconds after Shepard's death so much as hours and days before the revival process begins. In order then for the LP to be considered scientifically feasible, we'd have to assume that the brain can somehow retain the information in other ways unmeasurable by our current RL technology.

Now, that's not impossible, considering no one in current science can really claim to know the brain, but it does posit something other than what we currently know about the brain.

Yes. In the Liara comic we are probably talking about days (at least) before Shepard is retrieved. So let's say that information is lost during the time the brain is dead - the game don't contradict that possibility - if anything it support it. So what's the problem with this?

[Sejborg]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

Correct. That's why Jakob may have to explain what Cerberus is, even though Shepard have experience with them in the past. 

Right, but the important part of Ieldra's post is that every second that passes more info is lost. Based on the Liara comic, we aren't talking about seconds after Shepard's death so much as hours and days before the revival process begins. In order then for the LP to be considered scientifically feasible, we'd have to assume that the brain can somehow retain the information in other ways unmeasurable by our current RL technology.

Now, that's not impossible, considering no one in current science can really claim to know the brain, but it does posit something other than what we currently know about the brain.

but we know enough to say, that a dead brain is dead and the information is lost after several minutes without oxygen.

lost information is lost .. and lost functions are lost as well.

Have science ever brought a dead brain back to life? 

As for the functions - Shepard also get some extra bits and pieces.

Modifié par Sejborg, 19 février 2013 - 05:24 .

[CronoDragoon]

Sejborg wrote...
Yes. In the Liara comic we are probably talking about days (at least) before Shepard is retrieved. So let's say that information is lost during the time the brain is dead - the game don't contradict that possibility - if anything it support it. So what's the problem with this?

The problem with this is that saying information loss is accounted for in ME2 with Shepard not remembering what Cerberus is doesn't mesh with the rate at which information is lost after brain death. If they wanted to account for information loss, then everything would have been long lost by the time Miranda gets her hands on Shepard. Therefore, we have to assume that the brain stores that information in other ways in which we cannot currently (2013) measure.

Now if you want to say that the LP asserts that this is the case then I have no problem with that, but the LP does not in fact match up to what we know about brain death.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 19 février 2013 - 05:29 .

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

If it was explicitly forshadowed, it would be part of ME lore.

As it is, without it we have nothing to go on beyond what is known about human psysiology.

You can't just say "it's science fiction, so anything and everything is on the table"

That is exactly my point. I am arguing against the notion that it goes against ME lore, not that real life science supports it.

But lore needs a reason to exist.  the LP goes against medical science even in the ME universe .  Listen to Wilson's logs in ME2.  Heck, the Cronos station logs in ME3 bring up some of the very things we're discussing here (likely lampshading them).  But there's never explained where it came from.  How they figured out how to rebuild an oxygen starved brain to be "exactly" as it was before.  TIM basically threw a lot of money at the problem, and cured death.

[Ieldra]

Addictress wrote...
Aulf Wulff, I agree with you. But after Ielda clarified my questions, I think tshe would counter that you are now missing her point. Her point is more a criticism of the storytelling structure, not necessarily the infeasibility of the technology in the science fiction.

Indeed. The problem is storytelling technique, to be precise. If you use mystical terms rather than technical terms in what is clearly meant to be a descriptive account of what is, an exposition, you suggest that the mystical terms are somehow a more appropriate description of reality than the technical ones, and that redefines the universe in mystical terms.

[Dr_Extrem]

Sejborg wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

Correct. That's why Jakob may have to explain what Cerberus is, even though Shepard have experience with them in the past. 

Right, but the important part of Ieldra's post is that every second that passes more info is lost. Based on the Liara comic, we aren't talking about seconds after Shepard's death so much as hours and days before the revival process begins. In order then for the LP to be considered scientifically feasible, we'd have to assume that the brain can somehow retain the information in other ways unmeasurable by our current RL technology.

Now, that's not impossible, considering no one in current science can really claim to know the brain, but it does posit something other than what we currently know about the brain.

but we know enough to say, that a dead brain is dead and the information is lost after several minutes without oxygen.

lost information is lost .. and lost functions are lost as well.

Have science ever brought a dead brain back to life? 

As for the functions - Shepard also get some extra bits and pieces.

shepard has no implants in his/her brain ... and we are talking about the brain here.

and no .. dead humans are still dead. you cant trick the biochemistry of decay.

if they would have said: "here .. we have the latest medical scans as a map for sheps brain", it would be far more believable.

[Ieldra]

I would also recommend not pushing the Lazarus Project as the most appropriate example for what I'm criticizing. It's the least significant of the examples, and it only becomes significant with ME3.

[humes spork]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Indeed. The problem is storytelling technique, to be precise. If you use mystical terms rather than technical terms in what is clearly meant to be a descriptive account of what is, an exposition, you suggest that the mystical terms are somehow a more appropriate description of reality than the technical ones, and that redefines the universe in mystical terms.

That assumes the use of one descriptive category is exclusive to the other. It's not. Otherwise, you're guilty of the same offense when you say Legion dies in ME3 -- Legion's identity, in the context of MEU, being metaphor in the first place.

[Dr_Extrem]

but legions identity is not a metaphor .. its an ingame fact and its death ignores the established lore of the geth and ais.

[Wayning_Star]

I'm not sure which is more immersive, the game or the BSN MEU..

[xtal84]

There was never really a "descent." It started out with plenty of mysticism and space magic. It still managed to be entertaining fiction.

(Not referring to OP here:) If you think the series devolved into space magic in the last 10 minutes you're deluding yourself. ME2's ending is the worst logic break in the series, not ME3's. The Terminator had and still has no explanation. EDI says maybe Reapers create new Reapers in the form of the civilization they're harvesting. Why, then, do all the hundreds or thousands of Reapers in existence look exactly the same (excluding the fact that there are 4 different classes of them)? The logic had broke long before the end.

[Sejborg]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...
Yes. In the Liara comic we are probably talking about days (at least) before Shepard is retrieved. So let's say that information is lost during the time the brain is dead - the game don't contradict that possibility - if anything it support it. So what's the problem with this?

The problem with this is that saying information loss is accounted for in ME2 with Shepard not remembering what Cerberus is doesn't mesh with the rate at which information is lost after brain death. If they wanted to account for information loss, then everything would have been long lost by the time Miranda gets her hands on Shepard. Therefore, we have to assume that the brain stores that information in other ways in which we cannot currently (2013) measure.

Now if you want to say that the LP asserts that this is the case then I have no problem with that, but the LP does not in fact match up to what we know about brain death.

That is what I am saying. You can't just force our understanding of science into the MEU and point out all the stuff that don't make sense because you choose to use a different ruleset. You need to use the same ruleset as the universe you are in. Obviously the lazarus project is possible in the Mass Effect universe. Is it possible in our universe? I don't think so. 

[CronoDragoon]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I would also recommend not pushing the Lazarus Project as the most appropriate example for what I'm criticizing. It's the least significant of the examples, and it only becomes significant with ME3.

Couldn't I say that the mystical interpretation of Shepard's visions in ME1 were more important than the technical interpretation? Or that at least the technical explanation is handwaved throughout ME1? We don't even get an explanation for how Prothean artifacts work until ME3.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 19 février 2013 - 05:49 .

[Wayning_Star]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

but legions identity is not a metaphor .. its an ingame fact and its death ignores the established lore of the geth and ais.

it almost, to me anyways, seems analogous to Shep's synthesis within the dreaded beam?

[Dr_Extrem]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

but legions identity is not a metaphor .. its an ingame fact and its death ignores the established lore of the geth and ais.

it almost, to me anyways, seems analogous to Shep's synthesis within the dreaded beam?

in this case, shepards divejump is a repitition of legions death - boring.

[CronoDragoon]

Sejborg wrote...
That is what I am saying. You can't just force our understanding of science into the MEU and point out all the stuff that don't make sense because you choose to use a different ruleset. You need to use the same ruleset as the universe you are in. Obviously the lazarus project is possible in the Mass Effect universe. Is it possible in our universe? I don't think so. 

I take dr_extrem's argument to be that it since it isn't explicitly stated otherwise, we naturally assume that science is comparable to our science. Thus my claim that the LP's true problem was its unforeshadowed nature: all it would take is a codex entry in ME1 saying that scientists were researching the possibility of retrieving info from long-dead brains, or were researching the possibility of regenerating dead brains, but that the research became too cost-prohibitive. That's really all the groundwork you need for the LP to not feel a bit arbitrary.

[Dean_the_Young]

You know, after replaying Feros, I can't really buy into an argument of a 'descent' to mysticism. Forget psychic beacons or Liara: the entire Shiala sequence screams of it to me, going from the music, the quasi-tribal tatoos, the flickering flames like a campfire, to the extended use of Asari, well, mysticism-philosophy.

[Bizantura]

Mysticism in a game, euch........ yes right, really ??!!!

[Wayning_Star]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

but legions identity is not a metaphor .. its an ingame fact and its death ignores the established lore of the geth and ais.

it almost, to me anyways, seems analogous to Shep's synthesis within the dreaded beam?

in this case, shepards divejump is a repitition of legions death - boring.

I see what you mean, but am resisting getting bored in that respect, kind of going with the flow.

I kind of think the OP's intent to drive out mysticism in sci fi as admirable but folly, as it's to ingrained in humans as part of the 'self' in which all contend as space magic. Conditioning to the point of altering evolution, or maybe its all just part of it.

[Sejborg]

xtal84 wrote...

There was never really a "descent." It started out with plenty of mysticism and space magic. It still managed to be entertaining fiction.

(Not referring to OP here:) If you think the series devolved into space magic in the last 10 minutes you're deluding yourself. ME2's ending is the worst logic break in the series, not ME3's. The Terminator had and still has no explanation. EDI says maybe Reapers create new Reapers in the form of the civilization they're harvesting. Why, then, do all the hundreds or thousands of Reapers in existence look exactly the same (excluding the fact that there are 4 different classes of them)? The logic had broke long before the end.

Wasn't it explained that the reaper form is just the shell, and inside of each reaper shell will be an organism that somehow resembles the form of the harvested creature? But don't quote me on that.

However I do agree that there isn't any "descent" since the mysticism was in the franchise from the get go.

[mvaning]

humes spork wrote...

AnsinJung wrote...

But he's dead to the characters in the game.

1 An interesting point in a discussion about whether or not metaphor can (or should) have literal impact, and whether metaphor alone is viable means of storytelling in science-fiction, isn't it.

2
It's interesting that after fifteen pages of this thread discussing Legion's death, and using it as example to argue metaphor and allegory has no apparent place in science-fiction, nobody before me even thought for a second to mention Legion's identity itself is a metaphor.

1
-- Should it have a literal impact?   I think the answer to that is subjective.   If the reader likes it, that reader would say yes.   If the reader doesn't, then the opposite. 

2
-- Legion as a metaphor to Shepard himself?    As in, Legion is to the geth as Shepard is to humanity?   Legion's death forshadowing one of the possible choices at the end?  

humes spork wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Indeed. The problem is storytelling technique, to be precise. If you use mystical terms rather than technical terms in what is clearly meant to be a descriptive account of what is, an exposition, you suggest that the mystical terms are somehow a more appropriate description of reality than the technical ones, and that redefines the universe in mystical terms.

That assumes the use of one descriptive category is exclusive to the other. It's not. Otherwise, you're guilty of the same offense when you say Legion dies in ME3 -- Legion's identity, in the context of MEU, being metaphor in the first place.

It's not but there is alot of cross over.   The question should be asked.   At what point does the amount of mysticism in a story override the amount of science fiction?    If the defining characteristics of a science fiction story are mysticism, then is the story not mysticism?

Modifié par mvaning, 19 février 2013 - 05:58 .

[Ieldra]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

I would also recommend not pushing the Lazarus Project as the most appropriate example for what I'm criticizing. It's the least significant of the examples, and it only becomes significant with ME3.

Couldn't I say that the mystical interpretation of Shepard's visions in ME1 were more important than the technical interpretation? Or that at least the technical explanation is handwaved throughout ME1? We don't even get an explanation for how Prothean artifacts work until ME3.

Why would the visions be a problem? They're a kind of failed information processing. The source is known, and it's known why we can't process it until the Cipher comes along. The technology? Causing your brain to see moving pictures. Nothing fanciful, actually. The most "fantastic" about them is that they can span the galaxy in FTL, but we already have technology for that in the MEU.

[Wayning_Star]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Sejborg wrote...
That is what I am saying. You can't just force our understanding of science into the MEU and point out all the stuff that don't make sense because you choose to use a different ruleset. You need to use the same ruleset as the universe you are in. Obviously the lazarus project is possible in the Mass Effect universe. Is it possible in our universe? I don't think so. 

I take dr_extrem's argument to be that it since it isn't explicitly stated otherwise, we naturally assume that science is comparable to our science. Thus my claim that the LP's true problem was its unforeshadowed nature: all it would take is a codex entry in ME1 saying that scientists were researching the possibility of retrieving info from long-dead brains, or were researching the possibility of regenerating dead brains, but that the research became too cost-prohibitive. That's really all the groundwork you need for the LP to not feel a bit arbitrary.

I think in the beginning of the scene where Sheps body is in the processing stages, there is some of that info you refer to. But I cannot remember if it happens first or later when shep watched those vids on his resurrection. I'm thinking when the story first starts, just before shep wakes up tho..