706 réponses à ce sujet

[humes spork]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

but legions identity is not a metaphor...

Yes, it is. That's the point driven home in ME2 in Legion's introductory conversation coupled with exposition about the geth and the nature of their existence. "Legion" is a representation of the localized consensus of 1,183 geth runtimes in a single platform. There is no singular aspect of that entity to which you, or anyone else, can point and say "that's Legion", merely the gestalt the existence of which is not literal.

At the end of Priority: Rannoch, given the relevant outcomes, there is nothing in fact destroyed. The platform is shut down. The runtimes that constituted "Legion" return to the consensus. The shared experiences of those runtimes are disseminated into the consensus as typical for the geth (which is what is implied is necessary to execute the code upgrade). The only thing that ceases to exist is the confluence of those runtimes, in that platform, with that shared experience -- the gestalt, a metaphor.

Yet, we refer to Legion as having died as if some literal being has ceased to exist. If the literal and the metaphorical are mutually exclusive, the only disposition of that statement is that it is erroneous.

[Ieldra]

humes spork wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Invoking a theme badly: Legion's death. The necessity of Legion's death is just stated without giving a reason, against the very plausible objection that it shouldn't be necessary according to established in-world logic. Thus, the impression is given that sacrifice has an ontological meaning, that it changes the world because it is the giving of a life. It is suggested that the psychological effect the sacrifice has on us who read it exists in-world as a physical reality.

Okay, I have to say something about this. You're anthropomorphizing Legion, and treating its "death" as literal when it ought to not be. Literally, the 1,183 runtimes in the platform disseminate into the Consensus to execute the update. The platform shuts down. No more, no less. No entity that can be spoken of in literal terms ceases to exist; no entity that can be spoken of in literal terms ever really existed in the first place, if you want to go to the mats about it.

We are told that Legion's independent personality had fully actualized (EDI on the Normandy after Rannoch:Reaper base). The story treats his leavetaking as analogous to death. I think that's evidence enough to prove my point. I don't do any anthropomorphizing the story hasn't already done. Legion's identity is not metaphorical any longer.

(Though I prefer your interpretation as what should have happened)

@mvaning:
To answer your question, read the OP and this post.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 19 février 2013 - 06:04 .

[CronoDragoon]

Wayning_Star wrote...
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..

That isn't foreshadowing, though, because it's taking place at the same time as the LP. What I mean is that if you establish way early in the story that the concept of brain death might not be identical to reality's concept, then this makes it much easier to accept, later, the Lazarus Project.

It's like the difference between establishing rules for a magic system in a fantasy early on, and then using that knowledge to guide plot development, and introducing new rules into the magic system every time a plot development necessitates it. The former makes the reader feel like this plot development is working within the confines of the world, whereas the latter feels like the writer is making up new rules every time he wants the story to progress a certain way.

[Wayning_Star]

we got spirit traps everywhere an noone do difuse the issue..

[Dr_Extrem]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
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..

That isn't foreshadowing, though, because it's taking place at the same time as the LP. What I mean is that if you establish way early in the story that the concept of brain death might not be identical to reality's concept, then this makes it much easier to accept, later, the Lazarus Project.

It's like the difference between establishing rules for a magic system in a fantasy early on, and then using that knowledge to guide plot development, and introducing new rules into the magic system every time a plot development necessitates it. The former makes the reader feel like this plot development is working within the confines of the world, whereas the latter feels like the writer is making up new rules every time he wants the story to progress a certain way.

absolutely.

one log entry on the lazarus station could have dismissed my "problem" with the project: "we used chakwas latest medical scans, to help regenerate shepads brain."

if you know, how sheps brain was like, only days before the event, it would have been far more plausible and the implementation would have been far better.

[Wayning_Star]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
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..

That isn't foreshadowing, though, because it's taking place at the same time as the LP. What I mean is that if you establish way early in the story that the concept of brain death might not be identical to reality's concept, then this makes it much easier to accept, later, the Lazarus Project.

It's like the difference between establishing rules for a magic system in a fantasy early on, and then using that knowledge to guide plot development, and introducing new rules into the magic system every time a plot development necessitates it. The former makes the reader feel like this plot development is working within the confines of the world, whereas the latter feels like the writer is making up new rules every time he wants the story to progress a certain way.

Oh I get you.. luckily for me my foreshadow is built in. Not an objective viewer. I'm a proud subjective viewer.

Objective Point of View

I though, originally, the statements were about factual information describing Sheps resurrection, I didn't catch the inferences about foreshadowing future occurances.

[Nerevar-as]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
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..

That isn't foreshadowing, though, because it's taking place at the same time as the LP. What I mean is that if you establish way early in the story that the concept of brain death might not be identical to reality's concept, then this makes it much easier to accept, later, the Lazarus Project.

It's like the difference between establishing rules for a magic system in a fantasy early on, and then using that knowledge to guide plot development, and introducing new rules into the magic system every time a plot development necessitates it. The former makes the reader feel like this plot development is working within the confines of the world, whereas the latter feels like the writer is making up new rules every time he wants the story to progress a certain way.

absolutely.

one log entry on the lazarus station could have dismissed my "problem" with the project: "we used chakwas latest medical scans, to help regenerate shepads brain."

if you know, how sheps brain was like, only days before the event, it would have been far more plausible and the implementation would have been far better.

That would have been more of a back-up than a resurrection, which is what they were going for. It doesn´t matter either, as all they wanted was to begin the marketing campaign with a bang and didn´t bother to explore how Shepard would react to such a thing. Cerberus Base was too little and way too late.

[Dr_Extrem]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
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..

That isn't foreshadowing, though, because it's taking place at the same time as the LP. What I mean is that if you establish way early in the story that the concept of brain death might not be identical to reality's concept, then this makes it much easier to accept, later, the Lazarus Project.

It's like the difference between establishing rules for a magic system in a fantasy early on, and then using that knowledge to guide plot development, and introducing new rules into the magic system every time a plot development necessitates it. The former makes the reader feel like this plot development is working within the confines of the world, whereas the latter feels like the writer is making up new rules every time he wants the story to progress a certain way.

absolutely.

one log entry on the lazarus station could have dismissed my "problem" with the project: "we used chakwas latest medical scans, to help regenerate shepads brain."

if you know, how sheps brain was like, only days before the event, it would have been far more plausible and the implementation would have been far better.

That would have been more of a back-up than a resurrection, which is what they were going for. It doesn´t matter either, as all they wanted was to begin the marketing campaign with a bang and didn´t bother to explore how Shepard would react to such a thing. Cerberus Base was too little and way too late.

less mystical and more plausible.

[humes spork]

mvaning wrote...

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?

It is, but using that question as a basis for judging the quality of ME3 as a story is ultimately fruitless for the fact that, as you said, it is inherently subjective. Personally, I was quite comfortable with the level of "mystical" description in ME3, since we as the audience are clearly intended to question the philosophical nature of these topics.

Like, for example, the point I'm also making about Legion. People readily accept the notion that Legion somehow died, and somehow lived to have died in the first place. What Legion is, is very clearly exposited over the course of two games. Nothing literally ceases to exist when Legion "dies"; what is it about that moment that makes us identify it as a death, and why? What is the statement made about the human condition from that moment?

[Sejborg]

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.

Dr_Extrem seems just to be trying to trash the franchise just for the sake of trashing it. Wether it needed foreshadowing or no is a matter of taste.

However bringing people back from brain dead is clearly possible in the MEU. 


masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Cerberus_Daily_News_-_March_2010#03.2F04.2F2010

03/04/2010 - Earth Nations in Suspense as Systems Alliance Hears Ford v. Huerta[/i]“The nations of Earth are in suspense tonight as the Systems Alliance hears Ford v. Huerta, the first case of a human leader using reconstructive data storage to prolong his brain functions and stay physically capable to perform his duties. Speaker of the House Lisa Ford has led the charge against Huerta, saying that the last year of his term was illegitimate. A stroke left the President legally dead and in cryocool for an hour and a half before his brain functions were fully transferred to a computer. The amount of memory degradation was never fully revealed. According to the United North American States' line of succession, if Huerta was considered dead, then power would transfer to the Vice President and Speaker Ford would have held the position of Vice President for the last year.”
03/11/2010 - Petitioner's Witness Testifies in Ford v. Huerta[/i]“Expert witnesses were introduced today in the Systems Alliance trial of Ford v. Huerta, starting with the petitioner's side. Dr. Samuel Wachhaus testified today that President Huerta was brain-dead for too long to make a full recovery. Questioned on Huerta's apparent cognitive health afterward, Wachhaus testified that the VI ran Huerta's artificial memory so successfully that it took over his brain functions so that "there was no Huerta anymore. This is not a person with a VI memory, it's a VI with a partially-organic operating system". The respondent's experts will begin testimony tomorrow.”
03/12/2010 - Defendant's Witness Asserts President Huerta Made Full Recovery[/i]“Expert witness Dr. Lin Shiyin testified in the Systems Alliance trial of Ford v. Huerta today. He claimed that the former president made a full recovery from a temporarily brain-dead state. Stumbling a little when grilled on Huerta's timeline of cognition, Lin nevertheless made the case for Huerta being in full control once his motor functions and memory were assigned synthetic analogues. "To believe that he is now a different person, a synthetic, is to draw a line where no line is needed", he argued. "A new man did not appear on the table when the first open-heart surgery was performed. His life was merely extended beyond what was thought possible at the time".”
04/15/2010 - System Alliance Finds in Favor of President Huerta in 5-4 Decision[/i]“The controversial Earth court case of Ford v. Huerta came to a close today with a 5-4 decision supporting the end of the President's term. Chief Justice Ling announced, "This is not the first time human beings have technically died only to be brought back with proper medical attention. That the window of resuscitation has lengthened is no reason to support a partisan attack on the legitimacy of the President. The legal definition of death must be expanded beyond brain death to include cellular death as well". Following the decision, protesters erupted into violence on the Washington, D.C., Mall and in Mexico City's Chapultepec Park. The crowds chanting "Down with the zombie!" were quickly suppressed as riot police cleared the capitols with microwaves and stunners. More protests are reportedly planned for the weekend.”

[Dr_Extrem]

the franchise did it by itself ...

he cerberus daily news are aadly not part of me2 or three - adding those informations to the codex would have been helpfull.



and president huerta has a vi in his head, that has to tell him, who and what he is. the former prsident is more husk than human.

[Wayning_Star]

humes spork wrote...

mvaning wrote...

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?

It is, but using that question as a basis for judging the quality of ME3 as a story is ultimately fruitless for the fact that, as you said, it is inherently subjective. Personally, I was quite comfortable with the level of "mystical" description in ME3, since we as the audience are clearly intended to question the philosophical nature of these topics.

Like, for example, the point I'm also making about Legion. People readily accept the notion that Legion somehow died, and somehow lived to have died in the first place. What Legion is, is very clearly exposited over the course of two games. Nothing literally ceases to exist when Legion "dies"; what is it about that moment that makes us identify it as a death, and why? What is the statement made about the human condition from that moment?

human condition..now we're really in trouble.. Nobody can explain that,especially Legion.

but it might hint at what is 'the statement' that is made about it. How do 'define' death, or life for that matter?

Now stick scientific robots in and you got...I'm not sure what you got?

[Ieldra]

@all:
To illustrate that this is a problem of storytelling technique, here are a few simple ways this problem could've been avoided:

Lazarus: let a log hint that a technology had been developed to read information from dead brains, and that the success rate goes down with time. Then explain that Shepard had been recovered only a few hours after his death (there was the mayday call after all), and that his body was kept frozen while being moved around.

Human Reaper: use the cut dialogue with EDI explaining things in terms of "destructive analysis"

Synthesis: explain that Shepard's thoughts and memories will shape which kind of changes Synthesis will implement.

Only Legion's death escapes me at the moment. The explanation by humes spork would require that Legion didn't already have an independent personality.

[Wayning_Star]

Sejborg wrote...

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.

Dr_Extrem seems just to be trying to trash the franchise just for the sake of trashing it. Wether it needed foreshadowing or no is a matter of taste.

However bringing people back from brain dead is clearly possible in the MEU. 


masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Cerberus_Daily_News_-_March_2010#03.2F04.2F2010

03/04/2010 - Earth Nations in Suspense as Systems Alliance Hears Ford v. Huerta[/i]“The nations of Earth are in suspense tonight as the Systems Alliance hears Ford v. Huerta, the first case of a human leader using reconstructive data storage to prolong his brain functions and stay physically capable to perform his duties. Speaker of the House Lisa Ford has led the charge against Huerta, saying that the last year of his term was illegitimate. A stroke left the President legally dead and in cryocool for an hour and a half before his brain functions were fully transferred to a computer. The amount of memory degradation was never fully revealed. According to the United North American States' line of succession, if Huerta was considered dead, then power would transfer to the Vice President and Speaker Ford would have held the position of Vice President for the last year.”
03/11/2010 - Petitioner's Witness Testifies in Ford v. Huerta[/i]“Expert witnesses were introduced today in the Systems Alliance trial of Ford v. Huerta, starting with the petitioner's side. Dr. Samuel Wachhaus testified today that President Huerta was brain-dead for too long to make a full recovery. Questioned on Huerta's apparent cognitive health afterward, Wachhaus testified that the VI ran Huerta's artificial memory so successfully that it took over his brain functions so that "there was no Huerta anymore. This is not a person with a VI memory, it's a VI with a partially-organic operating system". The respondent's experts will begin testimony tomorrow.”
03/12/2010 - Defendant's Witness Asserts President Huerta Made Full Recovery[/i]“Expert witness Dr. Lin Shiyin testified in the Systems Alliance trial of Ford v. Huerta today. He claimed that the former president made a full recovery from a temporarily brain-dead state. Stumbling a little when grilled on Huerta's timeline of cognition, Lin nevertheless made the case for Huerta being in full control once his motor functions and memory were assigned synthetic analogues. "To believe that he is now a different person, a synthetic, is to draw a line where no line is needed", he argued. "A new man did not appear on the table when the first open-heart surgery was performed. His life was merely extended beyond what was thought possible at the time".”
04/15/2010 - System Alliance Finds in Favor of President Huerta in 5-4 Decision[/i]“The controversial Earth court case of Ford v. Huerta came to a close today with a 5-4 decision supporting the end of the President's term. Chief Justice Ling announced, "This is not the first time human beings have technically died only to be brought back with proper medical attention. That the window of resuscitation has lengthened is no reason to support a partisan attack on the legitimacy of the President. The legal definition of death must be expanded beyond brain death to include cellular death as well". Following the decision, protesters erupted into violence on the Washington, D.C., Mall and in Mexico City's Chapultepec Park. The crowds chanting "Down with the zombie!" were quickly suppressed as riot police cleared the capitols with microwaves and stunners. More protests are reportedly planned for the weekend.”

those computer people would probably argue about it as well, take it to the next level,er appeal.

[Wayning_Star]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@all:
To illustrate that this is a problem of storytelling technique, here are a few simple ways this problem could've been avoided:

Lazarus: let a log hint that a technology had been developed to read information from dead brains, and that the success rate goes down with time. Then explain that Shepard had been recovered only a few hours after his death (there was the mayday call after all), and that his body was kept frozen while being moved around.

Human Reaper: use the cut dialogue with EDI explaining things in terms of "destructive analysis"

Synthesis: explain that Shepard's thoughts and memories will shape which kind of changes Synthesis will implement.

Only Legion's death escapes me at the moment. The explanation by humes spork would require that Legion didn't already have an independent personality.

it's about diying as just stopping as opposed to, well.. mysticism. Legion 'ceases' to function and never ever ever ever will again..disconnected completely from the MEU?

supposedly organics can come back from the 'great divide' as Shep proves and apparently from news that others as well.

next we have to figure out where Edi and the rest of the robots obtained licence for 'life' as opposed to organics, who are 'supposedly' born with those..

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 19 février 2013 - 06:30 .

[humes spork]

Ieldra2 wrote...

The story treats his leavetaking as analogous to death.

Which is an interesting case all to its own, consdering any potential outcome of the suicide mission in which Legion "dies" is treated the same, well before the game establishes Legion's identity as actualized. Of course, in those instances its platform and/or runtimes are in fact destroyed, which makes it more a death than what occurs on Priority: Rannoch.

We are told that Legion's independent personality had fully actualized [...] Legion's identity is not metaphorical any longer.

These points do not logically follow, at least in my opinion. Because Legion was then capable of understanding its own gestalt as unique, does not mean it was necessarily a higher order, or more literal, existence. Do minds exist in the physical world? There was still nothing in fact lost when Legion disseminated its runtimes into the consensus. We simply take it on faith what we (and Legion, obviously) know as Legion had intrinsic value beyond the sum of its runtimes, platform, and experiences.

What in fact happens at that point is not interpretation, by the way. It disseminates its runtimes into the consensus to push the update, and its platform shuts down. That's what Legion tells you needs to happen, what does happen, and is corroborated by the geth prime that speaks to you after the fact even as it seems to impart intrinsic value to Legion's "identity".

Modifié par humes spork, 19 février 2013 - 06:41 .

[Sejborg]

humes spork wrote...

mvaning wrote...

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?

It is, but using that question as a basis for judging the quality of ME3 as a story is ultimately fruitless for the fact that, as you said, it is inherently subjective. Personally, I was quite comfortable with the level of "mystical" description in ME3, since we as the audience are clearly intended to question the philosophical nature of these topics.

Like, for example, the point I'm also making about Legion. People readily accept the notion that Legion somehow died, and somehow lived to have died in the first place. What Legion is, is very clearly exposited over the course of two games. Nothing literally ceases to exist when Legion "dies"; what is it about that moment that makes us identify it as a death, and why? What is the statement made about the human condition from that moment?

Because people start seeing Legion as sentient, so when that platform shuts down it is no longer sentient, and therefore it is now concidered dead. Legion is the synthetic counterpart to the organic Shepard. Legion gains understanding. Shepard has synthetic enhancements. When Shepard chooses control or synthesis we often say that he dies, but in fact the essence of Shepard lives on. 

Or how do you interpret it?

Modifié par Sejborg, 19 février 2013 - 06:42 .

[Wayning_Star]

humes spork wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

The story treats his leavetaking as analogous to death.

Which is an interesting case all to its own, consdering any potential outcome of the suicide mission in which Legion "dies" is treated the same, well before the game establishes Legion's identity as actualized. Of course, in those instances its platform and/or runtimes are in fact destroyed, which makes it more a death than what occurs on Priority: Rannoch.

We are told that Legion's independent personality had fully actualized [...] Legion's identity is not metaphorical any longer.

These points do not logically follow, at least in my opinion. Because Legion was then capable of understanding its own gestalt as unique, does not mean it was necessarily a higher order, or more literal, existence. There was still nothing in fact lost when Legion disseminated its runtimes into the consensus. We simply take it on faith what we (and Legion, obviously) know as Legion had intrinsic value beyond the sum of its runtimes, platform, and experiences.

it's/his 'identity' became so diffuse spread amongst the other Geth, as to be no longer accessible, no longer Legion.

Pretty much turned him off, for all practical purposes...

Life is the results of an ability to contain 'self' or the contruction of such a device, organic or synthetic doesn't matter?

[Wayning_Star]

How many 'personalities' can a human 'runtime'?

[humes spork]

Wayning_Star wrote...

it's/his 'identity' became so diffuse spread amongst the other Geth, as to be no longer accessible, no longer Legion.

That's explicitly exposited in ME2 to be an additive process, not subtractive. Indeed, even after that moment if those same 1,183 runtimes were to occupy the same platform, it would never again be "Legion" as we knew it. Which, by the way, due to how the geth consensus works in the first place is no different than if it had disseminated its runtimes into the consensus at any time before that point.

There was still nothing in fact lost when Legion disseminated its runtimes into the consensus. Yet, to say Legion dies implies something of intrinsic value was lost. So, why do we as the audience consider it such?

[Sejborg]

humes spork wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

it's/his 'identity' became so diffuse spread amongst the other Geth, as to be no longer accessible, no longer Legion.

That's explicitly exposited in ME2 to be an additive process, not subtractive. Indeed, even after that moment if those same 1,183 runtimes were to occupy the same platform, it would never again be "Legion" as we knew it. Which, by the way, due to how the geth consensus works in the first place is no different than if it had disseminated its runtimes into the consensus at any time before that point.

There was still nothing in fact lost when Legion disseminated its runtimes into the consensus. Yet, to say Legion dies implies something of intrinsic value was lost. So, why do we as the audience consider it such?

The same reason as we consider Shepard dieing in the control and synthesis ending.

[The Night Mammoth]

Sejborg wrote...

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.

Dr_Extrem seems just to be trying to trash the franchise just for the sake of trashing it. Wether it needed foreshadowing or no is a matter of taste.

However bringing people back from brain dead is clearly possible in the MEU. 

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Cerberus_Daily_News_-_March_2010#03.2F04.2F2010

 "This is not the first time human beings have technically died only to be brought back with proper medical attention. That the window of resuscitation has lengthened is no reason to support a partisan attack on the legitimacy of the President. The legal definition of death must be expanded beyond brain death to include cellular death as well".”

All well and good, but I have to admit that someone suffocating in space and falling through a planet's atmosphere to impact the surface at several hundred miles an hour or more, is kinda stretching my suspension. 

Shepard isn't just brain dead, her body is practically crushed, likely separating into pieces, and Lazarus isn't a simple resuscitation, but a complete reconstruction of her entire body costing over a billion credits. 

[PainCakesx]

 

mvaning wrote...
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?

It depends on the story being told. If a sci-fi story has fantasy elements from the beginning, such as Star Wars, elements such as "the force" and other mysticism in the series makes more sense. It fits within the established universe and lore and despite it being science fiction, the precedence set within the story allows these fantasy elements to work.

Mass Effect, while not realistic per se, has prided itself on scientific plausibility. Every bit of technology is explained with science and technology. Every alien has paragraphs of biological information and scientific justifcation for their appearance / culture etc. The game was crafted in such a way that while unlikely, the player could look at it and say "I could see that being plausible." When this precedent is set, employing space magic and overt fantasy tosses all of this out of the window, comes off as silly and breaks suspension of disbelief. 

At that point it crosses into fantasy territory.

Modifié par PainCakesx, 19 février 2013 - 07:02 .

[PainCakesx]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

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.

Dr_Extrem seems just to be trying to trash the franchise just for the sake of trashing it. Wether it needed foreshadowing or no is a matter of taste.

However bringing people back from brain dead is clearly possible in the MEU. 

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Cerberus_Daily_News_-_March_2010#03.2F04.2F2010

 "This is not the first time human beings have technically died only to be brought back with proper medical attention. That the window of resuscitation has lengthened is no reason to support a partisan attack on the legitimacy of the President. The legal definition of death must be expanded beyond brain death to include cellular death as well".”

All well and good, but I have to admit that someone suffocating in space and falling through a planet's atmosphere to impact the surface at several hundred miles an hour or more, is kinda stretching my suspension. 

Shepard isn't just brain dead, her body is practically crushed, likely separating into pieces, and Lazarus isn't a simple resuscitation, but a complete reconstruction of her entire body costing over a billion credits. 

I may have forgotten this part, but did they say that Shepard actually impacted the ground? It seemed like he was just orbiting around the planet for a while and died due to suffocation.

[CronoDragoon]

humes spork wrote...
There was still nothing in fact lost when Legion disseminated its runtimes into the consensus. We simply take it on faith what we (and Legion, obviously) know as Legion had intrinsic value beyond the sum of its runtimes, platform, and experiences.

I take it that the intrinsic value would be the particular arrangement of runtimes, platforms, and experiences. Individuals place intrinsic value on individuality, and so when that particular arrangement of details that constitutes a proper noun is lost then it is analogous to death. Perhaps that is anthropomorphization, as you called it, and it doesn't help that with the individualization of the geth, there remains no viewpoint in Mass Effect that can stop organics and EDI from identifying it as "death."

But to bring this back to the original point of Legion's death being more metaphorical than literal, I think the complaint comes from the idea that the metaphorical meaning of his death (metaphor here being used in a different sense than Legion's identity being a metaphor) is more obvious than the technical way that it proceeded: namely questions like why copying his personality into the consensus did not work. The literal was utilized to service the metaphorical, or so the argument would go. Still, such an argument by necessity must say that the event was still explained in literal terms. It's not as if what happens is explained in a metaphorical fashion; as you said, they explain what will literally happen and that's what happens.

Moreover, utilizing the literal in service of the metaphorical is pretty much how anyone crafts a story. It seems to me like the problem is the underwhelming logic for how the literal proceeds.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 19 février 2013 - 07:22 .