706 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
You should include Javik's "I read your physiology" magic as well! xD

Reading directly from a person is ok with me. Reading a person from rooms they've been in, or reading their mental disposition from what I assume have to be DNA samples, that's much worse. Yeah, perhaps I'll include that.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 18 février 2013 - 06:44 .

[David7204]

It seems to me that you're lumping two distinct 'issues' together and pretending they're the same thing. The issue of the writers intentionally including Synthesis-like elements as a stylistic choice and the issue of things like biotics, FTL travel, and Lazarus existing in the first place (which I very much doubt is an issue that much merit at all.)

Unfortunately, I'm going to have to wait a few hours to get back to this.

Modifié par David7204, 18 février 2013 - 06:51 .

[Wayning_Star]

Ieldra2 wrote...

humes spork wrote...
Let's not assume technobabble (which is what would replace thus-called "mystical" verbiage) is any more plausible or credible by merit of its own existence.

Perhaps not, but it's less suggestive of mysticism.

Also, I call BS on Shepard being the "omnidisciplinary scientist" it would require in-universe to understand in character the mountain of technobabble that would be heaped on the player at every corner were it not for "mystical" language. Shepard's a career soldier, not a scientist.

I don't question at every turn. Critical events surrounding the protagonist, however, I feel justified in trying to understand in in-world terms. Also my main Shepard isn't just some grunt, he's a military engineer with a solid grounding in electronics and electrical engineering. And lastly, I'm not a scientist either and I can deduce the nature of the Reapers just fine from the information given in ME2 and explain them without having to use expressions suggestive of mysticism. ME2's writers knew how to phrase it that way, too, as evidenced by the cut dialogue. So why didn't they? They WANTED this to be suggestive of mysticism. They wanted their universe to be interpretable in those terms, in spite of that obviously being nonsensical (in the case of Reaper creation) and in spite of more appropriate phrasings being available. That's what I find galling.

we really don't "know" that, we can assume that Ieldra2, but that is about all.

[Wayning_Star]

Ieldra2 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
You should include Javik's "I read your physiology" magic as well! xD

Reading directly from a person is ok with me. Reading a person from rooms they've been in, or reading their mental disposition from what I assume have to be DNA samples, that's much worse. Yeah, perhaps I'll include that.

we'd need intimate details of the prothean physiology, like how birds can tell directions and elephants can talk many miles apart and mate for life,etc. Heck, we accept that Shep/Femshep can have babies by Liara..so..stuff happens.


edit: not winning spelling bee's anytime soon...

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 18 février 2013 - 06:58 .

[humes spork]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Perhaps not, but it's less suggestive of mysticism.

Perhaps to you. To me, they're interchangable flavors of "bull****tium" introduced by the writer to maintain suspension of disbelief. I'd rather not suffer through a pseudoscientific exposition dump deliberately designed to baffle me into buying whatever is presented to me, especially when the use of one does not necessarily preclude the existence of the other.

Which is more economical, elegant, and relevant, "essence of a species" or "common core genetic markers, shared experience and sociocultural data, gleaned through destructive analysis of both genetic and engrammatic data by an aerosolized high-molar acid and nanite mixture, introduced to subjects sufficient to recognize common markers and render the margin of error for these markers statistically insignificant"? In the end, the latter describes the former anyways, and for that renders the entire exercise of using technobabble redundant and clumsy. It doesn't change "person goes in, goo comes out" one damn whit.

Also my main Shepard isn't just some grunt, he's a military engineer with a solid grounding in electronics and electrical engineering.

See, therein lies the problem. Shepard can be a combat engineer. That's not exactly a field that requires a research degree. Where does that leave other classes?

Modifié par humes spork, 18 février 2013 - 07:10 .

[Eterna]

I kind of Disagree, ME3 is still science based they just make no effort to explain the Science. It isn't really mysticism just because we don't understand it. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 18 février 2013 - 07:15 .

[Wayning_Star]

[quote]Ieldra2 wrote...

Perhaps not, but it's less suggestive of mysticism.[/quote]
Perhaps to you. To me, they're interchangable flavors of "bull****tium" introduced by the writer to maintain suspension of disbelief. I'd rather not suffer through a pseudoscientific exposition dump deliberately designed to baffle me into buying whatever is presented to me, especially when the use of one does not necessarily preclude the existence of the other.

Which is more economical, elegant, and relevant, "essence of a species" or "common core genetic markers, shared experience and sociocultural data, gleaned through destructive analysis of both genetic and engrammatic data by an aerosolized high-molar acid and nanite mixture, introduced to subjects sufficient to recognize common markers and render the margin of error for these markers statistically insignificant"? In the end, the latter describes the former anyways, and for that renders the entire exercise of using technobabble redundant and clumsy. It doesn't change "person goes in, goo comes out" one damn whit.


[quote]Also my main Shepard isn't just some grunt, he's a military engineer with a solid grounding in electronics and electrical engineering.[/quote]
See, therein lies the problem. Shepard can be a combat engineer. That's not exactly a field that requires a research degree. Where does that leave other classes?
[/quote]

come on folks science fiction isn't adversarial peer review..lol

(the other classes skipped and are out catching that newest sci fi flick.. it's great by the way!!)

[Ieldra]

Eterna5 wrote...
I kind of Disagree, ME3 is still science based they just make no effort to explain the Science. It isn't really mysticism just because we don't understand it. 

The problem is that some things are suggestive of mysticism by the terms used. I'm not just talking of unexplained things. An event is suggestive of mysticism when it has an allegorical meaning and it's described as if that allegorical meaning existed literally in-world. Instead of giving the event significance to the player by allegory, it's taken as if the allegory is significant for the in-world reality. That's practically what distinguishes a magical universe from one that's understood in terms of science.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 18 février 2013 - 07:32 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

@ Ieldra2: I read your original post. I agree with you.

Project Lazarus? There were so many other ways they could have handled getting Shepard working with Cerberus. However, that would have involved not derping the Council and the Alliance like they did. Instead they killed Shepard. Miranda resurrected Shepard. Whoa. Now we have the Phoenix myth.

I totally agree with you about the reaper creation.

Legion's sacrifice was completely unnecessary. The reaper code was software. Legion was composed of whatever number of runtimes or software. They went into some Christ-like mysticism.

Don't even get me started on the endings. It isn't simply synthesis. It's all of them. It's space magic plain and simple. The made the reapers too old, too many, and too powerful. The reapers had no weakness. That is not what made them awesome. That is what made them one of the worst enemies. It required space magic to defeat them.

I'm out of time right now, but I'll be back later.

[Wayning_Star]

folks on the BSN haven't met many cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super races lately..Maybe they should get out more?

[GreyLycanTrope]

Wayning_Star wrote...

folks on the BSN haven't met many cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super races lately..Maybe they should get out more?

I'll have you know my mother was a member of a cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super race. Good day sir!

[Wayning_Star]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

folks on the BSN haven't met many cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super races lately..Maybe they should get out more?

I'll have you know my mother was a member of a cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super race. Good day sir!

NOW we know why you chose Mehem...tsk tsk tsk

[mvaning]

ME3 is absolutely headed in to mysticism. The Synthesis and Control options are both great examples.

There is absolutely 0 scientific knowledge to support the idea that shepard's dissolved "essence" would suddenly release a huge explosion that would
1) Physically alter all organisms, OR
2) Physical assume control of all -reaper- machines.

There is nothing science about those notions, they are both mysticism.

While Destroy is more of a realistic idea, it is also mysticism. While we know that EMP pulses can disrupt electronics, there is no such scientific technology that could destroy all synthetic/computerized processes and leave biological organisms unharmed.

The ideas are complete nonsense from a scientific perspective. For the ME3 perspective, they represent philosophical ideas rather than ode's current or past scientific research. So yes, they are mysticism.

[Wayning_Star]

mvaning wrote...

ME3 is absolutely headed in to mysticism. The Synthesis and Control options are both great examples.

There is absolutely 0 scientific knowledge to support the idea that shepard's dissolved "essence" would suddenly release a huge explosion that would
1) Physically alter all organisms, OR
2) Physical assume control of all -reaper- machines.

There is nothing science about those notions, they are both mysticism.

While Destroy is more of a realistic idea, it is also mysticism. While we know that EMP pulses can disrupt electronics, there is no such scientific technology that could destroy all synthetic/computerized processes and leave biological organisms unharmed.

The ideas are complete nonsense from a scientific perspective. For the ME3 perspective, they represent philosophical ideas rather than ode's current or past scientific research. So yes, they are mysticism.

technically(tongue-in-cheek ) the catalyst and crucible 'with' Shep essence equate the synthesis blast...

I'm thinking that the inclusion of interactivity has more to do with the grumpies than any space magic has to do with synthetic mysticisms as a mechanic for disimination and decompilation of factualized events of science related to ME3.

Fans just cannot control the game as much as they like..so it's hammer time?

[Yate]

lol @ the people who believe there's a difference between advanced technology and magic

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I don't often agree with you but alot of your points here are correct.

[Dr_Extrem]

Wayning_Star wrote...

folks on the BSN haven't met many cosmic alien quasi-orgomechanical super races lately..Maybe they should get out more?

well .. you have not seen my first possible mother in law ..

[mvaning]

Wayning_Star wrote...

mvaning wrote...

ME3 is absolutely headed in to mysticism. The Synthesis and Control options are both great examples.

There is absolutely 0 scientific knowledge to support the idea that shepard's dissolved "essence" would suddenly release a huge explosion that would
1) Physically alter all organisms, OR
2) Physical assume control of all -reaper- machines.

There is nothing science about those notions, they are both mysticism.

While Destroy is more of a realistic idea, it is also mysticism. While we know that EMP pulses can disrupt electronics, there is no such scientific technology that could destroy all synthetic/computerized processes and leave biological organisms unharmed.

The ideas are complete nonsense from a scientific perspective. For the ME3 perspective, they represent philosophical ideas rather than ode's current or past scientific research. So yes, they are mysticism.

technically(tongue-in-cheek ) the catalyst and crucible 'with' Shep essence equate the synthesis blast...

I'm thinking that the inclusion of interactivity has more to do with the grumpies than any space magic has to do with synthetic mysticisms as a mechanic for disimination and decompilation of factualized events of science related to ME3.

Fans just cannot control the game as much as they like..so it's hammer time?

I think that many people who play ME tend to be very smart.    As well as I think that many people who enjoy science fiction are also very smart.   It lends to a complex mind.      So when they suddenly throw mysticism into a theme that tries to be somewhat scientific, people will call their BS.

[mvaning]

Yate wrote...

lol @ the people who believe there's a difference between advanced technology and magic

lol @ the people who believe there isn't a difference between advanced technolgy and magic.

[Ieldra]

@mvaning:
The idea that Shepard's thoughts and memories (that's what the Catalyst says when asked) could become the personality-defining part of a super-advanced AI isn't mysticism, and the the Reaper Control mechanism already exists in the Catalyst. Control is safe from that accusation.

Also, merely unexplained things are just that: unexplained. As long as it isn't suggested that mystical concepts are an appropriate way of describing their reality rather than scientific concepts, there is no problem. Hyper-advanced technology can be indistinguishable from magic in its effects because we don't know how the cause is connected to the effect. The problem starts once an explanation is attempted and suggests, for instance, that there is some non-allegorical meaning in an act of sacrifice as such, which changes reality as if it were technology. It's the line between saying "the information that makes up your person is used to shape the Synthesis" and saying "your essence is used to shape the Synthesis". The two might come down to the same in the end, but only the latter is suggestive of mysticism. It suggests a re-interpretation of the world in mystical terms.

[mvaning]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@mvaning:
The idea that Shepard's thoughts and memories (that's what the Catalyst says when asked) could become the personality-defining part of a super-advanced AI isn't mysticism, and the the Reaper Control mechanism already exists in the Catalyst. Control is safe from that accusation.

Also, merely unexplained things are just that: unexplained. As long as it isn't suggested that mystical concepts are an appropriate way of describing their reality rather than scientific concepts, there is no problem. Hyper-advanced technology can be indistinguishable from magic in its effects because we don't know how the cause is connected to the effect. The problem starts once an explanation is attempted and suggests, for instance, that there is some non-allegorical meaning in an act of sacrifice as such, which changes reality as if it were technology. It's the line between saying "the information that makes up your person is used to shape the Synthesis" and saying "your essence is used to shape the Synthesis". The two might come down to the same in the end, but only the latter is suggestive of mysticism. It suggests a re-interpretation of the world in mystical terms.

Merely unexplained things that go directly against current scientific knowledge can easily be interpreted as mysticism.   You might see Synthesis as plausible from a philisophical point of view.    From a molecular biologists point of view (or a chemists point of view, in my case), it is mysticism.  You cannot invasively change genetic code in any positive way.   Furthermore, you cannot invasively add-to genetics without invasive procedures.   That is magic.

Also, the idea that Shepard's thoughts and memories can be extracted from him within a matter of seconds before all fuctions of his brain are completely dissolved is also magic.  It would be more realistic that his body and mind are preserved and placed into stasis for taking control of the reapers.   I remember a different game that had the same idea: BGSoA: Throne of Bhaal.   At the end, the player could become a diety.   This however, was magic.  It didn't try to be science.    Now these are completely different games but the fact that I can relate the two endings so easily provides grounds for it to be considered mysticism.

Also, Shepard is probably no older than 30 years old.  The catalyst is millions of years old with millions of years of processes and events to shape and define what it has become.    The idea that the thoughts of a 30 year old man could redefine the thoughts of a machine with millions of years of processes places Shepard on a well earned diety-plate.   This diety plate is certainly mysticism.

Modifié par mvaning, 18 février 2013 - 09:38 .

[Reorte]

Yate wrote...

lol @ the people who believe there's a difference between advanced technology and magic

lol at the people who are happy for authors to write magic and claim it's advanced technology.

[Reorte]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@mvaning:
The idea that Shepard's thoughts and memories (that's what the Catalyst says when asked) could become the personality-defining part of a super-advanced AI isn't mysticism, and the the Reaper Control mechanism already exists in the Catalyst. Control is safe from that accusation.

Also, merely unexplained things are just that: unexplained. As long as it isn't suggested that mystical concepts are an appropriate way of describing their reality rather than scientific concepts, there is no problem. Hyper-advanced technology can be indistinguishable from magic in its effects because we don't know how the cause is connected to the effect. The problem starts once an explanation is attempted and suggests, for instance, that there is some non-allegorical meaning in an act of sacrifice as such, which changes reality as if it were technology. It's the line between saying "the information that makes up your person is used to shape the Synthesis" and saying "your essence is used to shape the Synthesis". The two might come down to the same in the end, but only the latter is suggestive of mysticism. It suggests a re-interpretation of the world in mystical terms.

I see where you're coming from (good OP too, nice to be able to agree with you for once!) but IMO there has to be more to it than that; I'm not going to buy completely far-fetched anything-you-can-imagine getting called science even if there is no explanation.

I've said it numerous times before but iffy bits that get used to set up the fictional universe get a pass too, as long as they don't push it too far. To a certain degree convention helps there, i.e. we're used enough to some sort of telepathy even in (largely soft) science fiction to accept some of the asaris' abilities yet rationally they're probably at the Synthesis level of implausibility.

[mvaning]

Reorte wrote...

Yate wrote...

lol @ the people who believe there's a difference between advanced technology and magic

lol at the people who are happy for authors to write magic and claim it's advanced technology.

I think mysticism plays alot into science fiction stories.   The question is:  How much mysticism can be accepted before the story moves from science fiction to fantasy?

Even Star Trek had the "Q" entity.   While I loved "Q", he was more mysticism than science fiction.

At this point, I think Mass Effect is more fantasy than science fiction.   Although I was under the assumption it was science fiction until the last 5 minutes of the game.   

Modifié par mvaning, 18 février 2013 - 09:51 .

[David7204]

Can anyone here actually explain to me what an EMP is and how it works? Because it seems to me that it's pretty foolish to discuss Destroy as one (or not) if you can't do so.

Also, the implications I've seen in this thread that Star Trek is somehow better than Mass Effect at not having bad science are laughable. You say "even Star Trek" as if content like Q is somehow uncommon in Star Trek? 

Modifié par David7204, 18 février 2013 - 10:02 .