706 réponses à ce sujet

[StarcloudSWG]

That it dumped science for mysticism.

And no. When neurons decay, they decay *fast*. And it's the pattern of connections between neurons, the whole set of links, that are responsible for memory and personality. When Shepard died, Shepard *died*. There should have been nothing left to rebuild; the only reason that Lazarus worked was because the writers needed the players to be thinking "Well, Shepard does owe her life to Cerberus, so..."

And there was no reason for Shepard to die in the first place. It was a poor attempt to justify the changed gameplay, an excuse to reset the character's level, neither of which were really necessary.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 02 mars 2013 - 09:05 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

That it dumped science for mysticism.

And no. When neurons decay, they decay *fast*. And it's the pattern of connections between neurons, the whole set of links, that are responsible for memory and personality. When Shepard died, Shepard *died*. There should have been nothing left to rebuild; the only reason that Lazarus worked was because the writers needed the players to be thinking "Well, Shepard does owe her life to Cerberus, so..."

Yes, the neurons decay, but as long as you have a map of them you can theoretically just remake them. Shepard did "die" but an exact copy of their brain was created and so Shepard was remade. It's not implausible, especially not for sci-fi science of the future.

[nos_astra]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

That it dumped science for mysticism.

And no. When neurons decay, they decay *fast*. And it's the pattern of connections between neurons, the whole set of links, that are responsible for memory and personality. When Shepard died, Shepard *died*. There should have been nothing left to rebuild; the only reason that Lazarus worked was because the writers needed the players to be thinking "Well, Shepard does owe her life to Cerberus, so..."

Yes, the neurons decay, but as long as you have a map of them you can theoretically just remake them. Shepard did "die" but an exact copy of their brain was created and so Shepard was remade. It's not implausible, especially not for sci-fi science of the future.

It's a good thing Cerberus had a map of them at their hands. A very recent one. (Not that there was any explanation how it was possible in the game. All of it is headcanon. The whole point of Lazarus was to hammer home that Shepard was somehow especially special and worth doing the impossible.)

Theoretically is not practically. Especially not as good as new with no issues whatsoever. No loss of memory, no major confusion, no psychologcial problems. Just up, grab a gun, shoot, move on.

At what point of ME was it established that dying was a non-issue because we can theoretically rebuild everyone from the scratch?

Modifié par klarabella, 02 mars 2013 - 09:20 .

[o Ventus]

klarabella wrote...

Theoretically is not practically. Especially not as good as new with no issues whatsoever. No loss of memory, no major confusion, no psychologcial problems. Just up, grab a gun, shoot, move on.

At what point of ME was it established that dying was a non-issue because we can theoretically rebuild everyone from the scratch?

I guess it's a good thing Lazarus wasn't an excruciatingly strenuous task that took billions of credit and years of work for something that most people involved didn't think would work, and wasn't regarded as nothing short of a miracle.

Oh wait, it was described as all of these things.

[SurfaceBeneath]

klarabella wrote...
It's a good thing Cerberus had a map of them at their hands. A very recent one.

Theoretically is not practically. Especially not as good as new with no issues whatsoever. No loss of memory, no major confusion, no psychologcial problems. Just up, grab a gun, shoot, move on.

At what point of ME was it established that dying was a non-issue because we can theoretically rebuild everyone from the scratch?

Cerberus has shown themselves capable of all sorts of things. Getting a scan of whenever Shepard last got a check up seems plausibly within their abilities given what we were shown they could do.

Also I didn't say that dying was a non-issue or that it was practical. The project took 4 billion credits and 2 years to do and was considered a medical marvel. As for psychological issues... well if their brain was perfectly recreated then why would they have issues? They'd have memories up to their death and then it'd just be a long sleep. 

Regardless, I'm not arguing that the Lazarus Project wasn't a bit of suspension of disbelief. Just that it's not mystical, or at least no more so than Eezo or Mass Effect fields. Frankly it's actually more grounded in reality than those concepts.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 02 mars 2013 - 09:25 .

[Obadiah]

"Brain Death" is weird term. I just read about it on about.com and it seems to be more a diagnosis of symptoms, rather than, er, and analysis or reading of activity.

I guess a doctor could claim brain death when in fact a deep deep deep coma was taking place.

*Shrug* I don't know enough about it.

@mvaning
*Looks at response below*  Nice definition, it just just doesn't describe how it is diagnosed. The diagnosis is why I said it was "weird" because it's somewhat non-definitive.

Modifié par Obadiah, 03 mars 2013 - 01:37 .

[mvaning]

Obadiah wrote...

"Brain Death" is weird term. I just read about it on about.com and it seems to be more a diagnosis of symptoms, rather than, er, and analysis or reading of activity.

I guess a doctor could claim brain death when in fact a deep deep deep coma was taking place.

*Shrug* I don't know enough about it.

Not sure how it is weird.   It has a dictionary definition and a medical definition.   Both of which can be found on merriam-webster.com  


Medical Definition: 

final cessation of activity in the central nervous system especially as indicated by a flat electroencephalogram(eeg) for a predetermined length of time


Non medical:

noun    (Concise Encyclopedia)

State of irreversible destruction of the brain. Before the invention of life-support systems, brain death always led quickly to death of the body. Ethical considerations are crucial to defining criteria for brain death, which in most countries must be met before efforts to extend life may be ended. Such criteria include deep coma with a known cause, absence of any brainstem functions (e.g., spontaneous respiration, pupil reactions, gag and cough reflexes), and exclusion of hypothermia, drugs, and poison as causes. Electroencephalography is useful but not essential in determining brain death.

Modifié par mvaning, 03 mars 2013 - 01:35 .

[mvaning]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Regardless, I'm not arguing that the Lazarus Project wasn't a bit of suspension of disbelief. Just that it's not mystical, or at least no more so than Eezo or Mass Effect fields. Frankly it's actually more grounded in reality than those concepts.

How is the LP more realistic than the ME fields?     I'm not trying to be cynical.   I just don't see where you are getting this idea and would like an explaination. 

As for mysticism.   While the LP is not direct mysticism, it is an allegory to dictionary definition mysticism.  The name, itself, alludes to a bible story about Jesus raising the dead of a man named "Lazarus."   

[StarcloudSWG]

Obadiah wrote...
@mvaning
*Looks at response below*  Nice definition, it just just doesn't describe how it is diagnosed. The diagnosis is why I said it was "weird" because it's somewhat non-definitive.

What's not definitive about it? Brain activity can be detected through measuring the change in input in sufficiently sentitive electrodes attached to the skull and neck.

If there's no neural activity, there will be no change in the measurements. The cells may be alive, but they're *not working*.  If they're *not working* then there's nothing there. No one home. Gone, good bye, call the clergy.

Even in the deepest comas, the neurons of the autonomic nervous system should be firing. If THAT goes, the body might be kept alive through artificial means, but the person has died and is not going to be coming back.

The whole thing *could* have been resolved with one line from Miranda, but there is no trace that they ever even thought about it.

Here's the way it *could* have been explained; "We have been lucky. While Shepard's brain is displaying no neural activity, the trauma module in [his/her] armor apparently responded to the vacuum and low-speed impact by releasing multiple injections of medigel. The bio-engineered plasm seems to have kept the neurons in a kind of hibernation. Despite the condition of the body, Wilson assures me that Shepard can be restored. The project is moving forward."

But because it's neither in the codex nor in the game, this is apocryphal head-canon at best.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 03 mars 2013 - 02:11 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Visiting this topic again and seeing that the Lazarus Project on the list is something I actually disagree with. There was never anything mystical about it, you were just meant to accept that it was a scientific miracle and move on.

[David7204]

I think the Lazarus project is not only completely solid scientifically, but an outstanding and well-executed plot point.

[mvaning]

@Obadiah: http://www.aan.com/p...eath_adults.pdf

Modifié par mvaning, 03 mars 2013 - 01:54 .

[Obadiah]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
@mvaning
*Looks at response below*  Nice definition, it just just doesn't describe how it is diagnosed. The diagnosis is why I said it was "weird" because it's somewhat non-definitive.

What's not definitive about it? Brain activity can be detected through measuring the change in input in sufficiently sentitive electrodes attached to the skull and neck.

If there's no neural activity, there will be no change in the measurements. The cells may be alive, but they're *not working*.  If they're *not working* then there's nothing there. No one home. Gone, good bye, call the clergy.

Even in the deepest comas, the neurons of the autonomic nervous system should be firing. If THAT goes, the body might be kept alive through artificial means, but the person has died and is not going to be coming back.

The whole thing *could* have been resolved with one line from Miranda, but there is no trace that they ever even thought about it.

Here's the way it *could* have been explained; "We have been lucky. While Shepard's brain is displaying no neural activity, the trauma module in [his/her] armor apparently responded to the vacuum and low-speed impact by releasing multiple injections of medigel. The bio-engineered plasm seems to have kept the neurons in a kind of hibernation. Despite the condition of the body, Wilson assures me that Shepard can be restored. The project is moving forward."

But because it's neither in the codex nor in the game, this is apocryphal head-canon at best.

So here's what I read about brain death here on about.com. To diagnose it they test consciousness, some reflex activity, and breathing without a ventilator. I suppose there would be more rigorous tests in the future. It seems fairly definitive to me, but as as far as fictionaly recovering from one, I can see this as something someone could potentially recover from.

mvaning wrote...

@Obadiah: http://www.aan.com/p...eath_adults.pdf

From the link:

PRACTICE PARAMETERS:DETERMINING BRAIN DEATH IN ADULTS...

II. Pitfalls in the diagnosis of brain death
The following conditions may interfere with the clinical diagnosis of brain death, so that the diagnosis cannot be made with certainty on clinical grounds alone. Confirmatory tests are recommended.
A. Severe facial trauma
B. Preexisting pupillary abnormalities
C. Toxic levels of any sedative drugs, aminoglycosides, tricyclic antidepressants, anticholinergics, antiepileptic drugs, chemotherapeutic agents, or neuromuscular blocking agents
D. Sleep apnea or severe pulmonary disease resulting in chronic retention of CO2

Obviously Shepard has undergone massive trauma, so that may cause a misdiagnosis of brain death.

Modifié par Obadiah, 03 mars 2013 - 03:20 .

[KevShep]

Its call chaos!

The rEApers were trying to prevent chaos with a new plot direction for ME3 and in turn ended up making chaos on a historical scale that had 3times the negative mass effect on its fans.

[mvaning]

Obadiah wrote...

mvaning wrote...

@Obadiah: http://www.aan.com/p...eath_adults.pdf

From the link:

PRACTICE PARAMETERS:DETERMINING BRAIN DEATH IN ADULTS...

II. Pitfalls in the diagnosis of brain death
The following conditions may interfere with the clinical diagnosis of brain death, so that the diagnosis cannot be made with certainty on clinical grounds alone. Confirmatory tests are recommended.
A. Severe facial trauma
B. Preexisting pupillary abnormalities
C. Toxic levels of any sedative drugs, aminoglycosides, tricyclic antidepressants, anticholinergics, antiepileptic drugs, chemotherapeutic agents, or neuromuscular blocking agents
D. Sleep apnea or severe pulmonary disease resulting in chronic retention of CO2

Obviously Shepard has undergone massive trauma, so that may cause a misdiagnosis of brain death.

They had some of the top scientists in the universe and a plethora of credits.    That report doesn't state that brain death is 100% misdiagnosed in the event of those conditions.   All it says is that it is possible and that comfirmatory tests are recommended.   

In two years time, I'm sure that it was confirmed that Shepard was dead.    And in fact, it is stated more than once in ME2 that Shepard was in fact dead.      By who, you ask?   Miranda, Jacob, the Illusive Man and then later confirmed again at Cronos in M3.  

[Auld Wulf]

klarabella wrote...

Theoretically is not practically.

This is basically still saying "I want no fiction in my science-fiction, only facts, therefore I actually want science-faction or some ****."

It's writing, it's fiction, and it's going to involve A.) some degree of theory and fiction, B.) some degree of symbolism. Unless we're talking about really hard sci-fi, you're going to run into this problem with every sci-fi out there, from Doctor Who, to FarScape, to FireFly, to whatever.

But who really stands up in the middle of Serenity, in a cinema, and starts yelling about why their systems for space travel wouldn't work factually? That's where I'm finding all this ridiculous, contrarian, and rank with hipster bull. Because BioWare is being held up to a standard that no sci-fi writer ever has been before. The only people that came close were the Star Trek nitpickers, and people tended to point and laugh at them for not understanding that a story is, indeed, a frickin' story.

Fiction isn't supposed to be rife with facts unless it's a documentary, but that's why a documentary is a documentary and not fiction. Fiction is fiction. Fiction begets fiction. Fiction is almost mutually exclusive with fact. This is not a true story, it is fiction. There is no fact, here. Only wild theory that lots of headcanon could be used to substantiate (if one has the imagination for that).

Expecting BioWare to be NASA is straight up bull****. Anyone who isn't just being a contrarian hipster for the sake of it knows that. And anyone who isn't being a contrarian hipster knows why you don't have fact-rife fiction. This whole discussion is completely asinine, and proves my perception of people around here not being exceptionally bright. That's why I don't have much patience any more, really.

That this discussion even exists, and that we have people arguing for more facts in fiction, is just... a joke. A very, very bad joke. And a joke that makes me want to cry rather than laugh.

[KevShep]

Auld Wulf wrote...

klarabella wrote...

Theoretically is not practically.

This is basically still saying "I want no fiction in my science-fiction, only facts, therefore I actually want science-faction or some ****."

It's writing, it's fiction, and it's going to involve A.) some degree of theory and fiction, B.) some degree of symbolism. Unless we're talking about really hard sci-fi, you're going to run into this problem with every sci-fi out there, from Doctor Who, to FarScape, to FireFly, to whatever.

But who really stands up in the middle of Serenity, in a cinema, and starts yelling about why their systems for space travel wouldn't work factually? That's where I'm finding all this ridiculous, contrarian, and rank with hipster bull. Because BioWare is being held up to a standard that no sci-fi writer ever has been before. The only people that came close were the Star Trek nitpickers, and people tended to point and laugh at them for not understanding that a story is, indeed, a frickin' story.

Fiction isn't supposed to be rife with facts unless it's a documentary, but that's why a documentary is a documentary and not fiction. Fiction is fiction. Fiction begets fiction. Fiction is almost mutually exclusive with fact. This is not a true story, it is fiction. There is no fact, here. Only wild theory that lots of headcanon could be used to substantiate (if one has the imagination for that).

Expecting BioWare to be NASA is straight up bull****. Anyone who isn't just being a contrarian hipster for the sake of it knows that. And anyone who isn't being a contrarian hipster knows why you don't have fact-rife fiction. This whole discussion is completely asinine, and proves my perception of people around here not being exceptionally bright. That's why I don't have much patience any more, really.

That this discussion even exists, and that we have people arguing for more facts in fiction, is just... a joke. A very, very bad joke. And a joke that makes me want to cry rather than laugh.

I dont think that your getting it...

Its not about absolute real life facts to there lore...its about  throwing out any explanation at all to how that worked. What we are saying is that we want it to be biased off of actuall science or at least try.

Bioware made NO attempt to explain it at all, that why its called space magic.

[mvaning]

KevShep wrote...


I dont think that your getting it...

Its not about absolute real life facts to there lore...its about  throwing out any explanation at all to how that worked. What we are saying is that we want it to be biased off of actuall science or at least try.

Bioware made NO attempt to explain it at all, that why its called space magic.

Meh, I'm fine with the suspension of disbelief without explaination.   I think in literature sometimes it is better not to have explainations.   In fact, I think Lazarus Project is fine as suspension of disbelief.    The problem is that suspension of disbelief is overused in ME and that is what I don't like.   

Modifié par mvaning, 03 mars 2013 - 04:25 .

[StarcloudSWG]

Auld Wulf wrote...

This is basically still saying "I want no fiction in my science-fiction, only facts, therefore I actually want science-faction or some ****."

It's writing, it's fiction, and it's going to involve A.) some degree of theory and fiction, B.) some degree of symbolism. Unless we're talking about really hard sci-fi, you're going to run into this problem with every sci-fi out there, from Doctor Who, to FarScape, to FireFly, to whatever.

But who really stands up in the middle of Serenity, in a cinema, and starts yelling about why their systems for space travel wouldn't work factually? That's where I'm finding all this ridiculous, contrarian, and rank with hipster bull. Because BioWare is being held up to a standard that no sci-fi writer ever has been before. The only people that came close were the Star Trek nitpickers, and people tended to point and laugh at them for not understanding that a story is, indeed, a frickin' story.

Fiction isn't supposed to be rife with facts unless it's a documentary, but that's why a documentary is a documentary and not fiction. Fiction is fiction. Fiction begets fiction. Fiction is almost mutually exclusive with fact. This is not a true story, it is fiction. There is no fact, here. Only wild theory that lots of headcanon could be used to substantiate (if one has the imagination for that).

Expecting BioWare to be NASA is straight up bull****. Anyone who isn't just being a contrarian hipster for the sake of it knows that. And anyone who isn't being a contrarian hipster knows why you don't have fact-rife fiction. This whole discussion is completely asinine, and proves my perception of people around here not being exceptionally bright. That's why I don't have much patience any more, really.

That this discussion even exists, and that we have people arguing for more facts in fiction, is just... a joke. A very, very bad joke. And a joke that makes me want to cry rather than laugh.

That's because you're comparing a Space Opera to Science Fiction. Science Fiction is grounded in Science. And that's how Mass Effect started, as Science Fiction. Apart from the one fantastic element allowed (Element Zero) everything else was expressed as consequences of Element Zero's effect (the manipulation of mass, inertia and gravity through the application of an electrical charge) or an extrapolation of trends we are seeing today.

Space Operas don't have to make as much sense. Space Opera is Star Trek. Space Opera is Battlestar Galactica. Space Opera is Firefly. Space Opera is Stargate. You can get away with looser rules in a Space Opera.

What we are objecting to here, is the fact that Mac Walters and most of Bioware's writing team took a solidly science fiction premise in the Mass Effect game, and turned it INTO Space Opera.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 04 mars 2013 - 07:29 .

[StarcloudSWG]

Obadiah wrote...

Obviously Shepard has undergone massive trauma, so that may cause a misdiagnosis of brain death.

Shepard crash landed on this planet:Alchera

Tell me what kind of atmosphere it has. Tell me what its temperature is. Tell me what its gravity is. Tell me what the biological effects of breathing those gasses is.

Then ask yourself this: Am I seriously going to cling to the hope that Shepard was just brain dead in the face of all evidence to the contrary, or am I going to admit Shepard was really, really, actually dead.

Note: You find Shepard's cracked helmet at the Normandy crash site. Think about what that implies.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 03 mars 2013 - 05:42 .

[Obadiah]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Obadiah wrote...

Obviously Shepard has undergone massive trauma, so that may cause a misdiagnosis of brain death.

Shepard crash landed on this planet:Alchera

Tell me what kind of atmosphere it has. Tell me what its temperature is. Tell me what its gravity is. Tell me what the biological effects of breathing those gasses is.

Then ask yourself this: Am I seriously going to cling to the hope that Shepard was just brain dead in the face of all evidence to the contrary, or am I going to admit Shepard was really, really, actually dead.

Look the ME2 intro to me doesn't make any sense. The only sensible explanation to me is that Shep went into orbit around the planet, was later recovered, and the light trail we see as Shep drifts towards the planet is some kind of optical illusion.

Now, about "brain death" - if Shep was dead, a medical doctor would just say "Shep is dead." "Brain death" is an unrecoverable vegetative state by defintion. So, I'm just advancing the idea that, given the nature of the tests for brain death, perhaps it was a misdiagnosis. This would take the Lazarus Project a little more away from the "mysticism" camp.

StarcloudSWG wrote...
...
Note: You find Shepard's cracked helmet at the Normandy crash site. Think about what that implies.

Shep might have had two helmets?

Modifié par Obadiah, 03 mars 2013 - 05:52 .

[KevShep]

mvaning wrote...

KevShep wrote...


I dont think that your getting it...

Its not about absolute real life facts to there lore...its about  throwing out any explanation at all to how that worked. What we are saying is that we want it to be biased off of actuall science or at least try.

Bioware made NO attempt to explain it at all, that why its called space magic.

Meh, I'm fine with the suspension of disbelief without explaination.   I think in literature sometimes it is better not to have explainations.   In fact, I think Lazarus Project is fine as suspension of disbelief.    The problem is that suspension of disbelief is overused in ME and that is what I don't like.   

Yeah it is in the thrid game, but not in the other two as the other two get explained in the codex.

[StarcloudSWG]

Obadiah wrote...

Shep might have had two helmets?

If Shepard was in orbit, Shepard was out of oxygen and exposed to vaccum; the scene clearly shows Shepard's suit punctured and leaking in multiple places. Neural activity stops pretty fast without oxygen, and then the body and brain cells die. If Shepard crashed, Shepard was exposed to a lethal caustic atmosphere and a high speed impact. And by high speed, I mean 120 mph unprotected; even free falling at .85 g's, Shepard's body would reach the terminal velocity of a falling human in atmosphere and then plow into the ground at that speed.

Either way, there was no question; Shepard was dead dead. Not just 'brain dead' but DEAD. The Lazarus project wasn't explained in game because the writers had no explanation. They chose not to make one. They chose not to delve into the lore and come up with one. They chose to justify the game play change and level reset as a time jump, by killing Shepard off and then resuming as if nothing happened.

What I'm saying is that a diagnosis of 'Shepard's just brain dead' is impossible given the nature of the planet Shepard fell from orbit onto, the in-character descriptions that Jacob gave of Shepard's body when it arrived at the Lazarus project, consistent with a high-speed impact that dismembered the body, and the cutscene where Shepard's suit is clearly punctured and losing atmosphere fast.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 04 mars 2013 - 07:59 .

[Foolsfolly]

The Suicide Mission and the deliberate mystification of the Reapers' creation
There exist alternative dialogue lines for EDI at the human Reaper which were never used. There, she explained the processing of humans as "destructive analysis", with the information gained in that analysis to become part of the Reaper mind. This was very plausible, reminiscent of the destructive uploading process used in harder SF universes where mind uploading is possible. This, however, was not used, replaced by the infamous "essence of a species" line which was suggestive of vitalism. This way, a mystical concept was re-introduced into the ME universe through a backdoor, at the expense of a believable explanation in terms that make some scientific sense. What made it worse is that the content of the older, cut version could actually be inferred from other parts of the game which were well-hidden from the player, most notably, Legion's rare post-SM dialogue, AND that the existing EDI/Shepard conversation made no sense at all, since it implied that the DNA was harvested as building material for the Reaper. It made so little sense that (a) I could infer the content of the cut lines without even knowing Legion's dialogue at the time, and ( that it was completely unbelievable that EDI would actually say something like that. The mystical vibe was deliberately inserted to replace an explanation that made more sense, by a character who's supposed to be intelligent enough to understand the implications. This comes across to me as a suggestion that we should take the mystical explanation literally and take nonsense for reality.

I'm not a fan of the 'essence of a being' crap either but it actually first appeared in ME1. The Thorian absorbed the 'essence of the protheans' if you remember. So apparently in the ME universe races have essences which can be stored.

[StarcloudSWG]

It did so through observation, and probably capturing a Prothean or two; we know the Thorian was able to access memories through the nervous systems of its absorbed victims. That's destructive analysis over the long term.

The Thorian is also the prime example of what the Reapers do, just in a biological manner. There are elements of indoctrination there too, in a crude way.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 04 mars 2013 - 05:58 .