706 réponses à ce sujet

[mvaning]

To add to my last post. I agree that Legion's sacrifice and the Lazarus Project are mysticism. To me, however, these were acceptable breaks from SF theme. I was willing to accept those unrealistic ideas without changing my attitude towards the game.

However, Bioware ended the game on mysticism. This made a statement about the theme the game is trying to portray. For me, philosophical statement or not, the ending dissolved the notion of Science Fiction and made it Fantasy. Which to me was sad. I enjoyed the semi-realistic qualities of ME as a science fiction story. Especially with how the graphics are presented.

[David7204]

And why is the Lazarus Project mysticism?

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

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.

EMP = electromagnetic pulse. A pulse of electromagnetic radiation, usually caused by rapidly  fluctuating magnetic fields or nuclear detonation. The fluctuating fields cause electrical currents to go haywire, as well as surging the voltage of the equipment. This causes whatever electrical equipment in radius of the EMP to malfunction. It can be shielded against, but generally the shielded equipment will still run with a few "glitches" as a result of the pulse.

Beyond that, I can't say. It would depend on whether or not Destroy actually IS an EMP or not. What characteristics does it share with an EMP? We know it destroys the Reapers (but leaves their physical bodies) as well as "most of" our technology. EDI and the geth are killed, and the relays are damaged. As seen in the epilogue, ships are still functioning. Everybody who is a biotic (or a soldier in general) is still alive, because presumably their enhancements and amps never fried their brain.

I doubt Destroy is an EMP.

Modifié par o Ventus, 18 février 2013 - 10:10 .

[David7204]

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

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.

EMP is an Electromagnetic Pulse. How does it work? Physics courses cost over 100$ a credit hour (at a cheap college). So read it yourself. http://en.wikipedia....omagnetic_pulse

Star Trek and ME have equally bad science. I don't think the question is who has worse science. I think the question is at what point does the mysticism (or bad science) of a story disiminate the quality of the story as a theme of science fiction.

I did not state that Destroy was an EMP, nor did I state that Destroy was not an EMP. I used it as an example but not as an explanation. Nor did I imply that Star Trek is better at bad science than ME. I think you should read my posts a little closer before making such assumptions. Furthermore, my point in relating to the Q character in Star Trek is to show that concepts of mysticism are not uncommon in Science Fiction.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

So explanation = came from Wikipedia?

Gotcha. Then again, I forgot that you were a condescending ******.

[Wayning_Star]

Physics courses cost over 100$ a credit hour

another good reason for synthesis...

[David7204]

In an earlier post, you were making proclamations plain as day as to what EMPs do and don't do.

mvaning wrote...

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.

Have you considered that it might be a good idea to understand the basics of how something works before you go around calling the use of it "complete nonsense from a scientific perspective"?

Modifié par David7204, 18 février 2013 - 10:25 .

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

EMP's will definately disrupt electronics, whether mobile or stationary.     Electronics are based on the principle that electrons flow across a metal wire.   If those electrons are disrupted, your electronics won't work. 

Modifié par mvaning, 18 février 2013 - 10:31 .

[David7204]

o Ventus wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

So explanation = came from Wikipedia?

Gotcha. Then again, I forgot that you were a condescending ******.

Please. You really think I can't tell the difference? The paragraph you posted and the first paragraph on Wikipedia are close enough to be clear you just reworded it.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

Please. You really think I can't tell the difference? The paragraph you posted and the first paragraph on Wikipedia are close enough to be clear you just reworded it.

So you're 110% that there's no way I could have just typed a statement crudely describing how an EMP works? By myself? Not at all?

I looked at Wikipedia in regards to EMP shielding, but not the EMP itself.

Again, you're a condescending jackass.

[Dabrikishaw]

Steelcan wrote...

So in short, ME devolved into horribly explained Space Magic.

ME1 and Lazarus I could live with. Lazarus definitely could have been a major point for ME2, but its kind of never really mentioned again after Freedom's Progress. Regardless I can accept that a universe where FTL travel and manipulation if dark energy might also have the e hnology to bring someone back to life.

The Reaper's creation only bugged me with EDI's "essence of a species". It was rather nonsensical for her to say. I think this was due to the writers wanting the reapers to be some unknowable "mystical" force. I know you have said you wanted an explanation for the Reapers, but I think ME2 firmly embraced "They cannot be understood". So I could live with this too. I would have preferred the cut line and making Legion's dialogue more easily accessible. But sadly I think the writers wanted this mystical quality to the Reapers, and I was fine to let them have it. I guess this ties in to the fortunately avoidable, "Soul of our species"

But in ME3, this mystical vibe definitely came through in full force. Legion's sacrifice was only put in for emotional attack. In order to "justify" it the writers turned to this illogical explanation. But I think this came down to prior lore being ignored for emotional impact. Nothing new here though. ME has always been rife with this.

And Synthesis. In game it's horribly explained. You seem to get around that. But I can't. I take the Catalyst's remarks at face value. He's not try to explain it in simpler language, he's spouting nonsensical vitalism. This is one reason I find Synthesis so unappealing.

[F4H bandicoot]

David7204 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

So explanation = came from Wikipedia?

Gotcha. Then again, I forgot that you were a condescending ******.

Please. You really think I can't tell the difference? The paragraph you posted and the first paragraph on Wikipedia are close enough to be clear you just reworded it.

Even so, that definition didn't materialise out of nowhere, the wikipedia definition will be correct, if it wasn't it'd have been editied to be correct.  Wikipedia isn't half as bad as people try to make out.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

and suddenly the relevant discussion in the thread disappears, because for the next several hours we will be sidetracked on this one little sticking point of defining an EMP.

OR, we can simply move on and ignore this part of the discussion and continue the way we were going.

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Pulling a definition off of Wikipedia is better than nothing, but it isn't great. Yes, you can have shielding, but as far I as know that only works for buildings and such. It doesn't work so well for anything expected to be mobile. No, it's not going to cause glitches. Electronics are pretty much going to work or they won't work.

So explanation = came from Wikipedia?

Gotcha. Then again, I forgot that you were a condescending ******.

Please. You really think I can't tell the difference? The paragraph you posted and the first paragraph on Wikipedia are close enough to be clear you just reworded it.

You are clearly trolling.   If you have anything constructive to give to this argument, then please give it.   Otherwise, you are just throwing around unfactual ideas based on your own opinions.      You think EMPs will not disrupt electronics?   Well sorry, physics says your wrong.     Go cry me a river, I believe physics. 

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Here is what an Electro Magnetic Pulse is. Read it, David.

http://www.doh.wa.go...elecpuls_fs.pdf

Another source:

http://www.britannic...netic-pulse-EMP

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 18 février 2013 - 10:47 .

[David7204]

I understand what an EMP is. Adequately enough to discuss it, anyway. The question is whether you understand it?

[mvaning]

Oh and here is an article about en EMP gun being developed to help police disable cars they are chasing.

http://abcnews.go.co...d=538452&page=1

Completely off topic but w/e

[ruggly]

Do you make it your job to go into every thread to dissect the tiniest of nuances? Or should have I even bothered with asking that, because now you'll ask what I mean.

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

I understand what an EMP is. Adequately enough to discuss it, anyway. The question is whether you understand it?

No, you don't understand it.   You just proved you don't understand it.   

[Eterna]

Ieldra2 wrote...

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.

Why can't Science and Mysticism mix? To be honest, a fully understood universe seems rather dull. I'd prefer if the Denizens of the Citadel and galaxy lived a Science based life, but beyond them and their existence there are things simply to complex and intricate to explain, sort of beyond their hope and our hope of understanding. 

For example, I thought Leviathan ruined the Mysticism of the Rachni. I thought it far more unique when we thought they used telepathy to communicate as opposed to the scientific explanation of pheromones that ants on Earth use. I feel as though it cheapened them. 

Modifié par Eterna5, 18 février 2013 - 10:52 .

[David7204]

I don't consider people making ridiculous and untrue accusations concerning topics they clearly do not understand the 'tiniest of nuances.'

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

I don't consider people making ridiculous and untrue accusations concerning topics they clearly do not understand the 'tiniest of nuances.'

What ridiculous and untrue accusations are you talking about?      The fact that all of the ME3 endings are mysticism and not based on actual science?    Or is it that I stated that EMPs can disrupt electronics?     Both are true.   If you believe otherwise, then you need to. . . .

Prove it. 

Otherwise, you are just babbling and have no justification for your words.

Modifié par mvaning, 18 février 2013 - 10:54 .

[Jadebaby]

Haargel wrote...

For Christ sakes, it's a bloody game. It's sci-fi, find yourselfs a miisy and if you're not able to in short term, go get a hooker.

What's wrong with you people. More and more I get the feeling that most people out here are some like the antagonist in the South Park episode: Make love, not Warcraft.

Lighten up a bit. Go out, have sex, use drugs, drink booze !

Yes, let's not complain about anything, then when companys get so slack they create a game called "fling the poop" don't come crying to those that critique games.

This is good critism.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

David7204 wrote...

I understand what an EMP is. Adequately enough to discuss it, anyway. The question is whether you understand it?

I understand that if someone sets off an EMP high in the atmosphere anywhere near the West Coast of the US I get to lose several thousand dollars worth of electronics. The power grid goes down. All solid state electronics are toast.

I know the military has back up communications that use the old vacuum tube tech because those will still be operational.