706 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

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.

I thought you were a physics major?

Also, did you know modern day scientists believe the key to light speed is closest to that of the technology involved in warp speed from star trek?

[David7204]

It's a Socratic question...I know the answer.

And I really doubt that's true, for various reasons. More likely a single laboratory released a statement or something that poised the possibility of technology kinda-sorta-maybe like Star Trek might-kinda-sorta-maybe work. In theory.

[Steelcan]

Rhetorical question, not Socratic

[David7204]

It's not rhetorical. I do want an answer.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Jadebaby wrote...

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.

I thought you were a physics major?

Also, did you know modern day scientists believe the key to light speed is closest to that of the technology involved in warp speed from star trek?

And did you also know that 45 years ago if you said that 45 years in the future you'd be talking into something the size of a communicator (original Star Trek) that also stores your music collection, send text messages, takes pictures, you can play games on it, that they would throw you in the nut house? Guess what?

[Meltemph]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Stuff

I sorta agree with you, but if you watch the Final Hours inverviews, and combined with Penny-Arcade forums post by Patrick, combined with what we are actually shown in game, and it seems far worse then that.  

If you watch the final hours invterviews Casey and Mac make it clear they view story points, along the plot, as "features", it also shows Casey's quite silly approach to storytelling, essetnially vetoing over his own writers(and replace with his own personal direction).  They both also convinced themselves that their animations are so good, that they properly convey emotion among their stories, and that games are just a different venu to tell a story, insteado of having a game have a very good story in it.  

A perfect example of his mindeset is where he gets his soruce of insparation from... He talks about movies, and describes them in a light that makes you wonder if he really wants to be a game developers or a "story" developer, which is highlighted by his "too videogamey" quote.  Honestly though, if Casey and Mac both view plot points and story branches as "features" the story is already ******.

Modifié par Meltemph, 18 février 2013 - 11:45 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Meltemph wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Stuff

I sorta agree with you, but if you watch the Final Hours inverviews, and combined with Penny-Arcade forums post by Patrick, combined with what we are actually shown in game, and it seems far worse then that.  

If you watch the final hours invterviews Casey and Mac make it clear they view story points, along the plot, as "features", it also shows Casey's quite silly approach to storytelling, essetnially vetoing over his own writers(and replace with his own personal direction).  They both also convinced themselves that their animations are so good, that they properly convey emotion among their stories, and that games are just a different venu to tell a story, insteado of having a game have a very good story in it.  

A perfect example of his mindeset is where he gets his soruce of insparation from... He talks about movies, and describes them in a light that makes you wonder if he really wants to be a game developers or a "story" developer, which is highlighted by his "too videogamey" quote.  Honestly though, if Casey and Mac both view plot points and story branches as "features" the story is already ******.

Chris "stormwaltz" l'etoile also comments about the direction bascially going towards the "doing it because it sounds cool" spectrum in the later installments, one of the reasons he left the writing team apparently.

[StarcloudSWG]

Ieldra:

Well said. On this, I agree with you completely; Mass Effect's writers devolved from a harder science standpoint to a Star Trek/Star Wars-like science fantasy; the introduction of mystic elements over the course of the series degraded its credibility significantly.

The 'Organic Energy' line was just one more insult spouted by the poorly written 'Intelligence.'

I wish the writing team hadn't pushed the more science oriented writers out.

[Meltemph]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Stuff

I sorta agree with you, but if you watch the Final Hours inverviews, and combined with Penny-Arcade forums post by Patrick, combined with what we are actually shown in game, and it seems far worse then that.  

If you watch the final hours invterviews Casey and Mac make it clear they view story points, along the plot, as "features", it also shows Casey's quite silly approach to storytelling, essetnially vetoing over his own writers(and replace with his own personal direction).  They both also convinced themselves that their animations are so good, that they properly convey emotion among their stories, and that games are just a different venu to tell a story, insteado of having a game have a very good story in it.  

A perfect example of his mindeset is where he gets his soruce of insparation from... He talks about movies, and describes them in a light that makes you wonder if he really wants to be a game developers or a "story" developer, which is highlighted by his "too videogamey" quote.  Honestly though, if Casey and Mac both view plot points and story branches as "features" the story is already ******.

Chris "stormwaltz" l'etoile also comments about the direction bascially going towards the "doing it because it sounds cool" spectrum in the later installments, one of the reasons he left the writing team apparently.

Ya, it really is confusing to me, how people can say the story was fine, up until the last 5 min.  Dont get me wrong, there were some great parts in the game, and the character growth in this game was better then the last 2, but the story was a flop, in totality compared to the last 2.  I guess if all you cared about is characters, you can get away with thinking the game was jsut peachy, but if you want anything more then that, I'm not sure how you got it.

[Obadiah]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Ieldra:

Well said. On this, I agree with you completely; Mass Effect's writers devolved from a harder science standpoint to a Star Trek/Star Wars-like science fantasy; the introduction of mystic elements over the course of the series degraded its credibility significantly.

The 'Organic Energy' line was just one more insult spouted by the poorly written 'Intelligence.'

I wish the writing team hadn't pushed the more science oriented writers out.

Kinda makes you wish one of the game's writers would POST what information they actually meant to convey with the Catalyst's explanation of Synthesis.

Modifié par Obadiah, 19 février 2013 - 12:16 .

[Meltemph]

Obadiah wrote...

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Ieldra:

Well said. On this, I agree with you completely; Mass Effect's writers devolved from a harder science standpoint to a Star Trek/Star Wars-like science fantasy; the introduction of mystic elements over the course of the series degraded its credibility significantly.

The 'Organic Energy' line was just one more insult spouted by the poorly written 'Intelligence.'

I wish the writing team hadn't pushed the more science oriented writers out.

Kinda makes you wish one of the game's writers would POST what information they actually meant to convey with the Catalyst's explanation of Synthesis.

Unfortunately, after watching the final hours interview, it seems pretty clear to me, based on what Mac said, that the information we were given was meant to be taken literally, from the catalyst, which makes him an info dump. The choices were not "meta-choices", the only real questions that were meant to come from the ending choices, it appears, was your mentality for picking them in the 1st place.

[mvaning]

David7204 wrote...

It's not rhetorical. I do want an answer.

It is not a socratic question either and you have stated that you already know the answer.  What does that mean?  It is clear that your point here is just to argue for no other reason than to argue over things that are meaningless in regards to the context of the thread.  

In any case, you are clearly unable to make a constructive counter-argument to prove my statement as wrong..  This being the case, the point you are trying to make by asking the question is invalidated.

As it is, my statement stands: The ME3 story has gone from science fiction to fantasy via mysticism.  The endings still make no sense from scientific perspective.

Modifié par mvaning, 19 février 2013 - 12:55 .

[Reorte]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Chris "stormwaltz" l'etoile also comments about the direction bascially going towards the "doing it because it sounds cool" spectrum in the later installments, one of the reasons he left the writing team apparently.

And that is it in a nutshell (although I find it hard to accept things looking cool if they don't work rationally as well - it just makes them look stupid rather than cool).

[Epique Phael767]

Mysticism no longer exists, Bethesda removed it.

[Obadiah]

Meltemph wrote...
...
Unfortunately, after watching the final hours interview, it seems pretty clear to me, based on what Mac said, that the information we were given was meant to be taken literally, from the catalyst, which makes him an info dump. The choices were not "meta-choices", the only real questions that were meant to come from the ending choices, it appears, was your mentality for picking them in the 1st place.

I haven't seen that interview, and to be fair, there is enough information on the effects of the choices given by the Catalyst for Shep to make a decision - at least for my Shepard. The lack of specifics, however, does break the immersion I had in the sci-fi atmosphere.

[mvaning]

Reorte wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Chris "stormwaltz" l'etoile also comments about the direction bascially going towards the "doing it because it sounds cool" spectrum in the later installments, one of the reasons he left the writing team apparently.

And that is it in a nutshell (although I find it hard to accept things looking cool if they don't work rationally as well - it just makes them look stupid rather than cool).

Yeah, this is probably the case.   I don't want to bash on their writers though but some of them sound like they would do better work on a dungeons and dragons game than a science fiction game.    But maybe their intent is for Mass Effect to be a fantasy story rather than a science fiction story?

[Reorte]

mvaning wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Chris "stormwaltz" l'etoile also comments about the direction bascially going towards the "doing it because it sounds cool" spectrum in the later installments, one of the reasons he left the writing team apparently.

And that is it in a nutshell (although I find it hard to accept things looking cool if they don't work rationally as well - it just makes them look stupid rather than cool).

Yeah, this is probably the case.   I don't want to bash on their writers though but some of them sound like they would do better work on a dungeons and dragons game than a science fiction game.    But maybe their intent is for Mass Effect to be a fantasy story rather than a science fiction story?

Fantasy should live by the rules too. It's just got more freedom in deciding what those rules are, but no story should make up new ones part way through (it may be able to get away with adapting and expanding ones it's already established). There should always be logic behind everything that happens, or at least good reason to think that there is logic even if we've not got all the information to work it out.

[Indy_S]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Sigh.

"Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it."

Show an old person set in their ways an iPhone, and they'll dismiss it as an unnecessary evil, potentially even a tool of the devil. Mass Effect doesn't 'descend into mysticism.' I see that as quasi-religious crap, to be blunt. Instead, it deals with higher level theories and future potentials. We're already well on our way towards a technological Singularity anyway.

The Lazarus project was something we could almost theoretically do today. Two hundred years in the future, with all of the technological and medical advancements involved, and the amount of money and resources that The Illusive Man has? And you'd find that unbelievable?

I'm sorry, but this is base ludditism at its best. You don't want to believe that science can advance past a certain point, so you decry it as mysticism, you attach a religious element to it in the hopes that others will decry it with you.

It's ridiculous. I'm guessing you're not a Nature reader, OP.

Well, at least you've had your say. You didn't address many of the issues raised in the OP, though. Ieldra highlights the conceits of the setting: FTL, biotics, inter-species relations. These things are established and utilised throughout the story. Then, Ieldra goes onto highlight the contrivances: Lazarus, Legion's Death, Synthesis. These are things that happen once, aren't supported by in-game lore and never get mentioned again. Saying 'we could theoretically do Lazarus today' doesn't remove it as a contrivance. We solved death! That should be important. But it isn't.

I find it a little ridiculous how you go about defending this game, as opposed to you actually defending it. I'm guessing you don't read very often.

[Sejborg]

I don't quite see the same descent from science to mysticism. Afterall we have Sovereign in ME1 saying: "We have no beginning, we have no end - we simply, are". Stuff like that don't fit very well into science fiction without any explanation.

The explanation came in Mass Effect 3 with Leviathan DLC, but until then the reapers were eternal - we always had the mysticism and the symbolic themes in the game. Granted - in ME1 and 2 it wasn't as much in your face as in ME3 (for instance calling the doomsday device "The Crucible" and what not) - but a descent from science to mysticism? Not really. It was always a part of the franchise.

[Indy_S]

Sejborg wrote...

I don't quite see the same descent from science to mysticism. Afterall we have Sovereign in ME1 saying: "We have no beginning, we have no end - we simply, are". Stuff like that don't fit very well into science fiction without any explanation.

The explanation came in Mass Effect 3 with Leviathan DLC, but until then the reapers were eternal - we always had the mysticism and the symbolic themes in the game. Granted - in ME1 and 2 it wasn't as much in your face as in ME3 (for instance calling the doomsday device "The Crucible" and what not) - but a descent from science to mysticism? Not really. It was always a part of the franchise.

That's fair. Eternal machines are a little strange. But progressing to Lazarus is clearly a descent of some kind.

[mvaning]

Indy_S wrote...

Auld Wulf wrote...

The Lazarus project was something we could almost theoretically do today. Two hundred years in the future, with all of the technological and medical advancements involved, and the amount of money and resources that The Illusive Man has? And you'd find that unbelievable?

I'm sorry, but this is base ludditism at its best. You don't want to believe that science can advance past a certain point, so you decry it as mysticism, you attach a religious element to it in the hopes that others will decry it with you.

It's ridiculous. I'm guessing you're not a Nature reader, OP.

Well, at least you've had your say. You didn't address many of the issues raised in the OP, though. Ieldra highlights the conceits of the setting: FTL, biotics, inter-species relations. These things are established and utilised throughout the story. Then, Ieldra goes onto highlight the contrivances: Lazarus, Legion's Death, Synthesis. These are things that happen once, aren't supported by in-game lore and never get mentioned again. Saying 'we could theoretically do Lazarus today' doesn't remove it as a contrivance. We solved death! That should be important. But it isn't.

I find it a little ridiculous how you go about defending this game, as opposed to you actually defending it. I'm guessing you don't read very often.

I find it LAUGHABLE to suggest that the Lazarus project is theoretically possible.     I'm sorry, but the science is clear on this.   Once you are dead, you are dead.   Sure, there have been cases of people coming back after brain death.   However, it is not really understood why they come back.   But an accepted theory on this?   No.   To my knowledge, the accepted theory is that brain death is not recoverable.   If there is some theory that says otherwise, please, I want to see. 

Lazarus project?  Mysticism?  I support this idea.

[Sejborg]

Indy_S wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

I don't quite see the same descent from science to mysticism. Afterall we have Sovereign in ME1 saying: "We have no beginning, we have no end - we simply, are". Stuff like that don't fit very well into science fiction without any explanation.

The explanation came in Mass Effect 3 with Leviathan DLC, but until then the reapers were eternal - we always had the mysticism and the symbolic themes in the game. Granted - in ME1 and 2 it wasn't as much in your face as in ME3 (for instance calling the doomsday device "The Crucible" and what not) - but a descent from science to mysticism? Not really. It was always a part of the franchise.

That's fair. Eternal machines are a little strange. But progressing to Lazarus is clearly a descent of some kind.

ME1: Machines that are eternal - called reapers - their function is to remove all life except for a few - Saren talks about being among the few that could continue living and he talks about being able to pick and choose who could go on and serve the gods/reapers (worshipped by geths) invites Shepard onboard - Noah's ark wannabe. 

ME2: Lazarus Project - Shepard/Messias returns from the dead.

I don't see the descent. 
By the way. I am not religious, but the mysticism and religoius themes were always there and clear to me. 

Modifié par Sejborg, 19 février 2013 - 01:34 .

[Indy_S]

Sejborg wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

That's fair. Eternal machines are a little strange. But progressing to Lazarus is clearly a descent of some kind.

ME1: Machines that are eternal - called reapers - their function is to remove all life except for a few - Saren talks about being among the few that could continue living and he talks about being able to pick and choose who could go on and serve the gods/reapers (worshipped by geths) invites Shepard onboard - Noah's ark wannabe. 

ME2: Lazarus Project - Shepard/Messias returns from the dead.

I don't see the descent. 
By the way. I am not religious, but the mysticism and religoius themes were always there and clear to me. 

I was thinking more of a descent into the use of contrivances.

[Sejborg]

Indy_S wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

That's fair. Eternal machines are a little strange. But progressing to Lazarus is clearly a descent of some kind.

ME1: Machines that are eternal - called reapers - their function is to remove all life except for a few - Saren talks about being among the few that could continue living and he talks about being able to pick and choose who could go on and serve the gods/reapers (worshipped by geths) invites Shepard onboard - Noah's ark wannabe. 

ME2: Lazarus Project - Shepard/Messias returns from the dead.

I don't see the descent. 
By the way. I am not religious, but the mysticism and religoius themes were always there and clear to me. 

I was thinking more of a descent into the use of contrivances.

I can see that. But I don't think that's the topic.