706 réponses à ce sujet

[mvaning]

Arcian wrote...

Jadebaby wrote...

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?

Eh, not really. Star Trek's Warp propulsion is
completely nonsensical on all levels. It builds on the Alcubierre drive,
sure, but their method of attaining the effect flies in the face of
science from all directions.

Well the first Star Trek episode was in 1966 while the Alcubierre drive theory was published in 1994.    I think they just adopted the theory so that they could make more sense of space travel in their story.  For me, this is acceptable in science fiction.   It doesn't have to be correct science and giving an ode to real science is a good thing.

Sejborg wrote...

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. 

I never really considered the reapers as mysticism.   They were always an "unknown," to me.   I still expected the reapers to have a non-mystical explanation.  This was regardless of the very obvious ode's to religion, such as the Lazarus Project.    Perhaps I was just being naive.   I still believe that mysticism has it's place in science fiction.   However, there is definately a line where the story is no longer science fiction and more fantasy.

[Sejborg]

mvaning wrote...
I never really considered the reapers as mysticism.   They were always an "unknown," to me.   I still expected the reapers to have a non-mystical explanation.  This was regardless of the very obvious ode's to religion, such as the Lazarus Project.    Perhaps I was just being naive.   I still believe that mysticism has it's place in science fiction.   However, there is definately a line where the story is no longer science fiction and more fantasy.

Where would you draw that line? Just out of curiosity. 

Modifié par Sejborg, 19 février 2013 - 01:56 .

[Meltemph]

Sejborg wrote...

mvaning wrote...
I never really considered the reapers as mysticism.   They were always an "unknown," to me.   I still expected the reapers to have a non-mystical explanation.  This was regardless of the very obvious ode's to religion, such as the Lazarus Project.    Perhaps I was just being naive.   I still believe that mysticism has it's place in science fiction.   However, there is definately a line where the story is no longer science fiction and more fantasy.

Where would you draw that line? Just out of curiosity. 

I would say it is around the same lines of a setting creates rules and then goes to lengths that imply the rules never mattered.  Science fiction creates a ground work of "rulesets" or "reality" within its own world, that sets expectations throught.  That isnt to say the rules cant be broken, but in order for them to be broken there has to be a very good reason for it, and the writer must let the reader know it is delving into fantasy(rule breaking) if the reader is at all inquisitive.

For instance, Star Trek dealt with Q in a way that made sense, and made it clear to the audience that they were delving into fantasy to draw a human paralel or "moral of the story" in regards to the actions of the human race.  When the MEU jumps shark, it is seemingly a fairly pointless venture, otuside of someones idea of creating a more "memorable" scene.  The diffence, I believe is in the context of "why" they are doing this.

Modifié par Meltemph, 19 février 2013 - 02:05 .

[Mercedes-Benz]

Good read, I agree that there are many things in the Mass Effect series (mostly Mass Effect 3) that make no sense whatsoever, it is implied that the Geth have souls (both by the way Legion dies and by what Tali says), synthesis being pure space magic (and even if it wasn't, Shepard wouldn't ever chose that option, since if he thought "ascension" was something good, he would have just let Saren activate the Citadel relay and let the Reapers harvest the Galaxy in the first game), etc., but the problem is not just with scientific things, for example, Miranda knows where the main Cerberus base/space station/headquarters is located (she was on it at the beginning of Mass Effect 2 and it's location hasn't changed), but somehow in Mass Effect 3 she forgets she was ever there and where it is located and has to use a tracker on Kei Leng to find it. There are a lot of things in the Mass Effect universe which are clear insults to the intelligence of players on BioWare's part.

[mvaning]

Sejborg wrote...

mvaning wrote...
I never really considered the reapers as mysticism.   They were always an "unknown," to me.   I still expected the reapers to have a non-mystical explanation.  This was regardless of the very obvious ode's to religion, such as the Lazarus Project.    Perhaps I was just being naive.   I still believe that mysticism has it's place in science fiction.   However, there is definately a line where the story is no longer science fiction and more fantasy.

Where would you draw that line? Just out of curiosity. 

I'm not sure.    If a story takes on more fantasy elements than science fiction elements, then it is fantasy. That is a simple answer.  However, if the primary plot line in a story is based on fantasy, but the rest of the story is science fiction, what genre does that make the story?    Fantasy science fiction?   Maybe the answer is subjective.

I think that if the "mystic" undertones of the game were more paranormal than religious, then the game would have more of a science fiction feel.   I guess the difference between mysticism and paranormal is a discussion in itself but there is definitely a difference.

Modifié par mvaning, 19 février 2013 - 02:32 .

[Sejborg]

Meltemph wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

mvaning wrote...
I never really considered the reapers as mysticism.   They were always an "unknown," to me.   I still expected the reapers to have a non-mystical explanation.  This was regardless of the very obvious ode's to religion, such as the Lazarus Project.    Perhaps I was just being naive.   I still believe that mysticism has it's place in science fiction.   However, there is definately a line where the story is no longer science fiction and more fantasy.

Where would you draw that line? Just out of curiosity. 

I would say it is around the same lines of a setting creates rules and then goes to lengths that imply the rules never mattered.  Science fiction creates a ground work of "rulesets" or "reality" within its own world, that sets expectations throught.  That isnt to say the rules cant be broken, but in order for them to be broken there has to be a very good reason for it, and the writer must let the reader know it is delving into fantasy(rule breaking) if the reader is at all inquisitive.

For instance, Star Trek dealt with Q in a way that made sense, and made it clear to the audience that they were delving into fantasy to draw a human paralel or "moral of the story" in regards to the actions of the human race.  When the MEU jumps shark, it is seemingly a fairly pointless venture, otuside of someones idea of creating a more "memorable" scene.  The diffence, I believe is in the context of "why" they are doing this.

You kinda lost me. I am stuck in the beginning of Star Trek original season 2 so I don't know any Q.

But I guess I get your drift anyways. To me it mostly wasn't a problem when scenes were created with symbolism in mind. For instance me1. Who in their right mind would decide to place the hologram of Saren so he towers over everyone - including the council? But it works on a symbolic or metaphorical level so I not just accept it - I appreciate it. 

However the symbolism was too much for me when the boy showed up as the catalyst. I wrote a topic about that a while back but I'm in my phone now so I can't link.

[EnvyTB075]

Haargel wrote...

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

Get infected, get in a fight, get a broken nose or end in a coma and/or destroy your liver. Perfectly more acceptable than finding enjoyment in analysing a literary work in between your daily events.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 19 février 2013 - 03:09 .

[mvaning]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Haargel wrote...

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

Get infected, get in a fight, get a broken nose or end in a coma and/or destroy your liver. Perfectly more acceptable than finding enjoyment in analysing a literary work in between your daily events.

You can do atleast one of those things while analysing literary work.

[EnvyTB075]

mvaning wrote...

You can do atleast one of those things while analysing literary work.

True, but only if you were an upstanding gentleman who doesn't go to clubs specifically to throw up on the curb and call it "a good time".

[Auld Wulf]

Actually, the Alcubierre drive theory could work. It would require exotic matter and the drive being switched on and off really fast, but still, it's definitely something that's more possible than impossible. So if that's considered 'mysticism' then I retain my standpoint that people use 'mysticism' to label any science they don't understand enough to attribute as science.

[Indy_S]

Auld Wulf wrote...

Actually, the Alcubierre drive theory could work. It would require exotic matter and the drive being switched on and off really fast, but still, it's definitely something that's more possible than impossible. So if that's considered 'mysticism' then I retain my standpoint that people use 'mysticism' to label any science they don't understand enough to attribute as science.

*Skips argument until seeing a familiar term. Ties term and topic without awareness of context. Reaches conclusion that topic should be dismissed.* /Auld Wulf

[humes spork]

Ieldra2 wrote...

...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.

So really, what this boils down to is you're personally uncomfortable with invocation of non-scientific language applied to scientific topics for metaphysical, transcendental, or even spiritual connotations...seemingly regardless of the sensibility of that language.

So, here's a tangential, but relevant, question. Are you uncomfortable with Carl Sagan's work? He uses what you would refer as "mystical" language continually throughout, in reference to the non-fictional world and non-fictional science, and even goes so far as to cite scientific inquiry itself as a source for spirituality.

Modifié par humes spork, 19 février 2013 - 05:17 .

[CosmicGnosis]

humes spork wrote...

So, here's a tangential, but relevant, question. Are you uncomfortable with Carl Sagan's work? He uses what you would refer as "mystical" language continually throughout, in reference to the non-fictional world and non-fictional science, and even goes so far as to cite scientific inquiry itself as a source for spirituality.

Sagan used "mystical" language for poetic effect, but he backed it up with actual science.

Example: "Star stuff, the ash of stellar alchemy, had emerged into consciousness."

That quote refers to the fact that the human brain is made of atoms that were forged within stars. "Stellar alchemy" is different from "organic energy".

By the way, I've often wondered what ending choice Sagan would make.

[Addictress]

I feel like everyone in this thread was a condescending ****** except David.

:/

[Addictress]

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

Good read, I agree that there are many things in the Mass Effect series (mostly Mass Effect 3) that make no sense whatsoever, it is implied that the Geth have souls (both by the way Legion dies and by what Tali says), synthesis being pure space magic (and even if it wasn't, Shepard wouldn't ever chose that option, since if he thought "ascension" was something good, he would have just let Saren activate the Citadel relay and let the Reapers harvest the Galaxy in the first game), etc., but the problem is not just with scientific things, for example, Miranda knows where the main Cerberus base/space station/headquarters is located (she was on it at the beginning of Mass Effect 2 and it's location hasn't changed), but somehow in Mass Effect 3 she forgets she was ever there and where it is located and has to use a tracker on Kei Leng to find it. There are a lot of things in the Mass Effect universe which are clear insults to the intelligence of players on BioWare's part.

The station could easily move.

[humes spork]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Sagan used "mystical" language for poetic effect, but he backed it up with actual science.

Of course he did, but the question is whether or not his use of poetic, transcendental, or even "mystical" language to refer to real-world science constitutes deliberate obfuscation or conference of allegory. Sagan, when using such language, clearly intended to impart a transcendental sense to science itself, to inspire the curiosity and wonder that at its heart drives scientific inquiry. It's the beating heart of his professed belief those things are their own source of spirituality, without making un-falsifiable, positive, metaphysical claims. In that sense, even as such statements were made with understandable scientific basis, the "allegory" was "literal".

Modifié par humes spork, 19 février 2013 - 06:45 .

[nos_astra]

Addictress wrote...
The station could easily move.

Not the point here.

[Addictress]

klarabella wrote...

Addictress wrote...
The station could easily move.

Not the point here.

There are a thousand points in the thread; it could be interpreted as a free-for-all.

Anyways I don't have science to contribute. I just felt bad for David taking all the fire and felt like he should know that one lurking reader was on his side.

[David7204]

Cool.

[jancz89]

this is one of the reasons why I count only Mass Effect 1 as canon, ME2,ME3 are just fanfictions

[txgoldrush]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ 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.

And yet here is where people ignore the narrative....Legion mentioned that he has the remants of the Reaper upgrade code, and he was hiding this info the entire time. There is no plot hole here, Legion wasn't forthright all the time.

[Indy_S]

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet here is where people ignore the narrative....Legion mentioned that he has the remants of the Reaper upgrade code, and he was hiding this info the entire time. There is no plot hole here, Legion wasn't forthright all the time.

How does he have the code without falling under their influence? Hell, as a conduit, he'd be exposed to the strongest Reaper signal there. Why is he able to maintain his independance? If the plot hole's not at the end of that arc, it's at the beginning.

[txgoldrush]

Mercedes-Benz wrote...

Good read, I agree that there are many things in the Mass Effect series (mostly Mass Effect 3) that make no sense whatsoever, it is implied that the Geth have souls (both by the way Legion dies and by what Tali says), synthesis being pure space magic (and even if it wasn't, Shepard wouldn't ever chose that option, since if he thought "ascension" was something good, he would have just let Saren activate the Citadel relay and let the Reapers harvest the Galaxy in the first game), etc., but the problem is not just with scientific things, for example, Miranda knows where the main Cerberus base/space station/headquarters is located (she was on it at the beginning of Mass Effect 2 and it's location hasn't changed), but somehow in Mass Effect 3 she forgets she was ever there and where it is located and has to use a tracker on Kei Leng to find it. There are a lot of things in the Mass Effect universe which are clear insults to the intelligence of players on BioWare's part.

Yes, Miranda knows where Cerberus HQ is, but she does NOT know where Kai Leng is headed. Quit trying to invent plot holes that aren't there. Kai Leng could have gone anywhere. Kai Leng has the VI, thats who they were after, not Cerberus HQ.

And did you miss the narrative in ME2 where Legion reveals the questions that scared the quarains "does this unit have a soul?"

[EnvyTB075]

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet here is where people ignore the narrative....Legion mentioned that he has the remants of the Reaper upgrade code, and he was hiding this info the entire time. There is no plot hole here, Legion wasn't forthright all the time.

Right, which means absolutely nothing for the end result, and has everything to do with his superior hacking skills to get past Geth defenses in the base and his superiority over other Geth with his unique facets covered in ME2. No other physical platform contains as many programs as his, hence with the Reaper Code upgrade (which ALL Geth have mind you, and not EVERYONE dies) he is far more intelligent than other Geth.


0/10, try again.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 19 février 2013 - 07:18 .