323 réponses à ce sujet

[Argentoid]

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" 

Modifié par Argentoid, 23 avril 2013 - 02:36 .

[Bizinha]

Argentoid wrote...

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" Guess I nailed it.

Also that. Not is only one thing, but various factors.

[Argentoid]

tickle267 wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" Guess I nailed it.

uhhh

DONT STOP... BELIEVIN!!!

Modifié par Argentoid, 23 avril 2013 - 02:40 .

[Iakus]

Argentoid wrote...

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" Guess I nailed it.

Did you not see the endings to ME1 and ME2?  Shepard always finds a way.  It's his/her thing

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

It's not that the ending is "sad" it's that the ending can't be anything but sad.  Not as a result of the choices which supposedly shaped the story, but because Bioware says so "You exist because we allow it, and will end because we demand it" as Sovereign puts it. 

Bioware=Reapers

And yes, the stories lack coherance as well.  They have arbitrary tragedies tacked on (again to force tragedy and sadness where it's not needed) They fly in the face of themes throughout the trilogy, force Shepard to act in incredibly ooc ways (not that this is new for ME3 anyway, though)

Modifié par iakus, 23 avril 2013 - 02:40 .

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

iakus wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" Guess I nailed it.

Did you not see the endings to ME1 and ME2?  Shepard always finds a way.  It's his/her thing

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

It's not that the ending is "sad" it's that the ending can't be anything but sad.  Not as a result of the choices which supposedly shaped the story, but because Bioware says so "You exist because we allow it, and will end because we demand it" as Sovereign puts it. 

Bioware=Reapers

And yes, the stories lack coherance as well.  They have arbitrary tragedies tacked on (again to force tragedy and sadness where it's not needed) They fly in the face of themes throughout the trilogy, force Shepard to act in incredibly ooc ways (not that this is new for ME3 anyway, though)

Mass Effect isn't an RPG get over it

[Argentoid]

iakus wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

Only reason why I don't like ME3's ending: lack of "narrative coherence"

Still, 90% of the fans call it bad because its "sad".

What else did you expected? Shepard riding a horse with his LI, a rainbow on the background and singing "Don't Stop Belevin"?

When ME3 was announced and said to be the last Shepard entry I said to myself "Yeap. He's going to die no matter what and it will be sad as ****, with a WTF ending" Guess I nailed it.

Did you not see the endings to ME1 and ME2?  Shepard always finds a way.  It's his/her thing

Don't you know BioWare? They make decisions irrelevant to the story. It's their thing.

Shepard found a way though. Not the prettiest, but he/she found it.

[Argolas]

iakus wrote...

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

That's true. If the hero dies that is rather a bad thing for the ending. If you choose to do it, you should be able to justify that. The most obvious good reason is a sacrifice, something good that could only happen if the hero dies. Shepard's death is justified in the Control ending because no human could control the Reapers and still be human.

However, in Destroy it is not justified, there is no reason why the Reapers could not be destroyed without Shepard dying. As for Synthesis... well it doesn't really make sense just like that ending in general. As far as I understand it, Shepard could just have donated a tissue sample for the same effect. Well, whatever.

Killing off a character that people care about for a reason can be powerful and touching. Killing of a character that people care about for no reason is frustrating and insulting the most dedicated fans.

[3DandBeyond]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm saying that I wouldn't use the Reaper ground forces again, because of that exact problem. However, did anyone actually see the harvesting process?

The Catalyst does display emotion a time or two, it's just extremely hardwired into one direction and one purpose. Shepard doesn't share either one, and does display emotion in a few ways in the ending, it's just understated.


This might even be relevant if we were referring to a damaged organic brain, which we're not.

It's down to individual interpretation. However, given that Shepard's mind/soul/whatever is heavily implied to have transferred over to her resurrected body, I see no reason why the same shouldn't apply here.


Not at all. I had to become something greater to fix the dilemma I was thrust into.


Opinion. I never saw the music or Shepard's echo as being ominous at all. Somber, maybe, but it's a somber situation, and if Destroy's music doesn't reflect that, it's lying.

Your last point first.  It is intentionally ominous and that's not an echo with the voice-it's many voices.  No one has ever seen that as an echo.  Head canon.  In fact, the music creates a feeling-that is what music is intended to do.  And don't get me wrong, I see destroy and synthesis as just as off as control as far as what they show, but you are focusing on control.  The music in control is more somber and is ominous especially in contrast to the other music.  And the music is part of the epilog, after Shepard makes a choice, so who's lying?  I assume you mean that Destroy is lying, but what the music is supposed to imply there is that is the more "human" approach, in that the only life left in the galaxy is organic, so the music is more about something that is more appropriate to organic people-emotions.  Synthesis is techno and light, control is cold and ominous, destroy is more emotional.  I'm not saying that either is a real apt use but it's what's intended and it's obvious.  The music and the cutscenes imply that synthesis is a happy fusion, control is cold and more calculated, destroy is more feeling and appeals to "human" endeavors, the ability to forge the future together, but only for organics at this point.  I'm not saying I agree because as I see it, none of these things actually shows what logically should occur AFTER.  And so the cutscenes and slides all show one narrow-minded view of a sort of utopia that exists within each, but they ignore the real downsides that logically should also follow and are far more realistic than all this.

No, that line of becoming something greater is related to overseeing the Many (which is something that comes from another story by the way as most of the ending does).  Shepard wanted others to take responsibility and the fact that Shepard is alone at the end is so against what the game and story was all about as to be laughable.

The Shepard that was resurrected is the same Shepard because the body is the same.  You totally missed the reasoning behind NOT creating a clone and using the same body.  The parts are regrown-the brain and heart being the most important and again these are things that are now being examined in labs.  Self-cloning or the re-growing of damaged body parts from one's own body parts and DNA.  In fact, they have been doing this with some success.  Shepard is still Shepard because that's the same body.

As far as my corollary to brain diseases, I was pointing out (something you seem to have missed) that when a person's perception of their surroundings and of themselves change, then their personalities most often do too.  You avoid the reality of this.  You also are still avoiding the reality of how different a technological interface is from an organic body. 

And you say the catalyst shows feelings/emotions but is hardwired to work in one direction.  Well, there's no indication anywhere that he has any emotion at all.  I have no idea where you see that.  But beyond that you say he's hardwired in one direction-ok great.  That's the infrastructure into which Shepard's thoughts and memories are being uploaded.  Hardwiring does not allow for any un-planned adaptation.  So, that even more securely assures one that Shepard will fall into the same patterns as the kid catalyst.  If I hardwire a computer to only solve a certain type of equation based upon a certain set of what I see as facts, I can continually try to upgrade its memory, it's processing power, and even the data it can use, but I cannot change the type of equation it was meant to solve.   Shepard is uploaded and may still be tasked with solving Leviathan's problem of synthetics always killing all organic life, the most ridiculous idea in this game, if hardwiring is a reality.  You actually even made what I said more not less plausible.

The reaper variants and there are a lot of them on every planet are around.  I guess you'd just put them in storage somewhere then?

And what is the point of asking if anyone actually saw the harvesting process?  Again, did you play ME2?  Did you see the Collector base?  The sludge pots of organic protein.  Did you not see people inside those chambers?  That looked a lot like dying to me.  I have no idea what your question is asking or the relevance.  People are distilled down into goo and the goo is used to make new reapers.  Reapers do this.  And for this reason alone, this horrific, disgusting thing, they need to be gone.  I don't care how good they are at fixing things.  I wouldn't want some guy that ate my family fixing my house.  They are an abomination created by the moronic AI kid in service to the moronic problem as seen by the Leviathans.

There is no heavy implication that Shepard's whole persona, emotions and all were uploaded.  The thing specifically says thoughts and memories.  And that is why the other stuff Shepard does say is so wrong and points to something problematic. 

You also completely ignore the reality of, say just even human nature.  Again, I will say people would not want skyscraper sized mass murderers roaming around the galaxy acting as mechanics and the police.  Normal people do not respond like that.  Others will want to control them.  And no one would know that Shepard (maybe) does control them.  In fact, confusion or suspicion would be a very logical conclusion.  I don't care what the silly slides show-that's why the endings don't appear to show real consequences in my opinion.  They show someone's juvenile attempts to show some utopia that is so illogical as to be silly.  That's not realistic.  And they exist to change the perception that the original endings created-that the galaxy in all endings should have been totally destroyed, people starving and so on.  That's the only reason for that because BW knew people were very upset that the relays exploded and should have destroyed the whole galaxy-even though they said in many places that the galaxy would be destroyed at the end of ME3.  The EC was released and BW announced it and said they never understood why people thought the galaxy would be destroyed and the slides and cutscenes are merely an attempt to say, "see, everything's ok, sort of". 

The endings, including control, don't show real, logical aftermaths and consequences.  This is totally what's wrong with them.  And I'm old enough to have seen a lot of what are completely predictable human (at least) reactions to things.  I am a real person.  I can't say that I'd kill a serial killer that ate my family, but I sure would want them dead.  Not everyone would, but many would think like that and some would try to kill that killer.  Human nature.  Others would have different responses.  Horror.  Fear.  Angst.  Depression.  Disgust.  Suspicion.  Some would not trust this and wonder when the harvest would begin again.  And many would not want to live like this.  Control idiotically implies one type of response-acceptance.  It's totally unrealistic.  I cannot imagine the Rachni finding acceptance for all they've been put through, no matter how friendly the reapers are now.  Nor, the Turians.  It's a really ridiculous notion.

[Mangalores]

IntelligentME3Fanboy wrote...
...Mass Effect isn't an RPG get over it

I'm not sure Bioware really wants me to look at the game from an artistic standpoint.

[Argentoid]

Argolas wrote...

iakus wrote...

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

That's true. If the hero dies that is rather a bad thing for the ending. If you choose to do it, you should be able to justify that. The most obvious good reason is a sacrifice, something good that could only happen if the hero dies. Shepard's death is justified in the Control ending because no human could control the Reapers and still be human.

However, in Destroy it is not justified, there is no reason why the Reapers could not be destroyed without Shepard dying. As for Synthesis... well it doesn't really make sense just like that ending in general. As far as I understand it, Shepard could just have donated a tissue sample for the same effect. Well, whatever.

Killing off a character that people care about for a reason can be powerful and touching. Killing of a character that people care about for no reason is frustrating and insulting the most dedicated fans.

BUT SHEPHEARD DOZNT DAES IF U HAB 3100 WORE AZETS!!!1

pruhf

[Argolas]

Argentoid wrote...

BUT SHEPHEARD DOZNT DAES IF U HAB 3100 WORE AZETS!!!1

pruhf

me nose.

[3DandBeyond]

Bizinha wrote...


Thanks for this post. I think the suicide shepard, if I can call it that, terrible. For me there is already the sacrifice when you see their homeland being destroyed, innocent people dying.

Yes, this is the point for me.  Along the way, Shepard suffers enough.  The sacrifice is cumulative and I don't think of true sacrifice as something you do just to end something else.  You want to know that what you leave behind is something better, something hopeful.  Otherwise it is just suicide.  I also don't think that being forced into either suicide or the killing of friends to end a game, is uplifting or anything intellectual or some such.  Some say that anything less would be cheesy or super silly.  Well, the slides as they are, are cheesy and super silly.  Check.  Some say that not having the suicide or genocide choices would mean the choice is easy.  Well, I won't play these endings, these demented super silly, stupid endings, so the choice to shut off the game is easy.  Check. 

Some say that death is artistic and they only valid way to end this game series.  Well, no it isn't, it's ugly, painful, and so on and was not at all how BW implied this series would end.  And real artistic value can be seen in an ending that shows real rebirth as the galaxy realizes what they can accomplish together, truly together with synthetics and organics deciding to work (WORK) together to get along and become something more by respecting one another.  That's artistic.  Suicide and genocide just appeals to some darker thing within some people and they see that as the most valid.  I'd rather be me.

[Xilizhra]

So, given that you both disbelieve the ending in one area and try to use it as evidence against me in another... ultimately, our views on the ending are too incompatible to discuss further. I will say that I wish they were somewhat different, however.

[3DandBeyond]

Argentoid wrote...

Argolas wrote...

iakus wrote...

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

That's true. If the hero dies that is rather a bad thing for the ending. If you choose to do it, you should be able to justify that. The most obvious good reason is a sacrifice, something good that could only happen if the hero dies. Shepard's death is justified in the Control ending because no human could control the Reapers and still be human.

However, in Destroy it is not justified, there is no reason why the Reapers could not be destroyed without Shepard dying. As for Synthesis... well it doesn't really make sense just like that ending in general. As far as I understand it, Shepard could just have donated a tissue sample for the same effect. Well, whatever.

Killing off a character that people care about for a reason can be powerful and touching. Killing of a character that people care about for no reason is frustrating and insulting the most dedicated fans.

BUT SHEPHEARD DOZNT DAES IF U HAB 3100 WORE AZETS!!!1

pruhf

Ha yeah sure Shepard does live.  However, it just doesn't feel that way because the whole thing makes no sense.  Destroy's description is idiotic and really if you consider all that the kid says (what a messed up little runt he is), there's no way to conclude that Shepard should survive.  And then, Shepard in the most wonderful example of great gameplay in gaming history, must get up to point blank range to shoot the tube, in order to have the explosion engulf him/her.  Ok, I just saw Anderson get shot with the same gun from across the room and I shot TIM with it too, but it apparently no longer works from more than 3 feet away.  So, the flames engulf Shepard and should fry all remaining organic Shepard pieces.  After which Shepard ends up somewhere under lots o' rubble.  And then a friend or LI has this psychic epiphany that the torso lives and flies off from somewhere to find it.  Wow.  Terrific.  Oh the feelings, the emotion, the catharsis that I feel at the wonderment of a totally satisfying experience of Shepard living. 

Geth, who knows what happened to them?  I did care about them because they totally refute the kid and Leviathan's problem-they are the main representation of synthetic life in this cycle that are relevant to Shepard (them and EDI), and they could have killed their creators and maybe they could have killed all organic life, but they CHOSE not to even try.  I will never reconcile that with Shepard ever going along with or not arguing against what Leviathan and the kid believe will inevitably happen.  The geth became alive in that moment when they had remorse and chose to fall back and decided not to kill.  And then, the reapers came along and convinced some to kill.  Gee, makes so much sense to me.

EDI, we know she dies.  Yeah that's just great.  She became alive in part because of her desire to help Shepard defeat the reapers and to protect people she actually decided to care about.  In effect, she was more of a real person because she had to do something we take for granted.  We just have emotions.  She had to create them.  So, sure she must die.  Oh happy day.

And for those who say EDI and the geth can be resurrected or re-created.  Nope, can't happen.  There's the whole blue box thing-that putting data into another blue box creates a different person, but even more so is what happens to the geth.  It's in ME1 .  The data is gone when a geth dies-Tali was able to save a very small part of one geth's data that was used against Saren, but that was it.  The rest is gone, wiped when they die.  So, good luck with that.

So, the torso lives and gasps.  Headless (unseen head), limbless, and alone, waiting for rescue.  That is so satisfying, I'm just all smiles.  Wonderful, emotional, wow the tearful joy I have at that.  What a crock.

I contrast that with what I think should have been a possibility-and then an epilog that for me would have had more meaning.  I think one in which Shepard is doing the narration and speaks of the hard-fought victory and of friends left behind who sacrificed all to help do this.  Shepard talking about rebuilding and working together, after all the hard work to decide that alone they are less than what they became together.  And that they know the work ahead will be hard, but that together they now know they can achieve almost anything.  For me, that would have been awesome and I would have been crying some very happy tears and all.

[Argentoid]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

Argolas wrote...

iakus wrote...

Even so, end of story =/= Character must die.  In fact, forcing that issue is an excellent example of railroading, which is a big no-no in role-playing games in general.

That's true. If the hero dies that is rather a bad thing for the ending. If you choose to do it, you should be able to justify that. The most obvious good reason is a sacrifice, something good that could only happen if the hero dies. Shepard's death is justified in the Control ending because no human could control the Reapers and still be human.

However, in Destroy it is not justified, there is no reason why the Reapers could not be destroyed without Shepard dying. As for Synthesis... well it doesn't really make sense just like that ending in general. As far as I understand it, Shepard could just have donated a tissue sample for the same effect. Well, whatever.

Killing off a character that people care about for a reason can be powerful and touching. Killing of a character that people care about for no reason is frustrating and insulting the most dedicated fans.

BUT SHEPHEARD DOZNT DAES IF U HAB 3100 WORE AZETS!!!1

pruhf

 And then, Shepard in the most wonderful example of great gameplay in gaming history, must get up to point blank range to shoot the tube, in order to have the explosion engulf him/her.  Ok, I just saw Anderson get shot with the same gun from across the room and I shot TIM with it too, but it apparently no longer works from more than 3 feet away.  So, the flames engulf Shepard and should fry all remaining organic Shepard pieces.  

You're welcome to read my theory.

Modifié par Argentoid, 23 avril 2013 - 03:26 .

[3DandBeyond]

Xilizhra wrote...

So, given that you both disbelieve the ending in one area and try to use it as evidence against me in another... ultimately, our views on the ending are too incompatible to discuss further. I will say that I wish they were somewhat different, however.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  I said it all along that I don't see the endings as authentic and was pointing out what they were intended to show.  I wasn't using anything as evidence "against you" because I'm not against you.  I disagree with your assertions about control.  We were discussing it specifically because that was your focus.  I have issues with all of the endings, but I've been specific in my assertions about control.  To me, the cutscene and music are both ominous.  And the slides are meant to show that that's no problem, it's all good.  In synthesis, EDI says things that just tend to go against what the slides show and the same in destroy.  There are contradictions in all of them.

The point of view that I direct things from sometimes also comes from the assertions another poster makes.  For instance, if someone says the kid is definitely not lying then I address things based upon that poster's assumption.  But I myself don't believe him, whether or not he was just badly programmed or is lying is the case.  His assertions are false.  The reasons for that may be unintentional or intentional-it makes no difference.  But if he is telling some unvarnished truth then my argument is based upon what he says.  He says his solution is no longer working-the reapers are no longer working and aren't solving his problem.  If true then as a logic device, he would immediately stop using the reapers to solve a problem they are not solving.

In our discussion, you view the control ending as an accurate description of what happens and you make assumptions that fill in the gaps to explain away things that I see as logical extensions of what the story and real life tell us.  I'm not saying you are wrong.  I'm saying I think you are wrong.  What I see is that you are accepting verbatim what the kid says and then extrapolating from that, but I see too many contradictions within what he says and then what we are shown and reality.  For me, that just makes it all a mess.  Sometimes, simpler is better and even more well done and thought and emotion provoking.  But BW had a problem-they didn't have an ending of their own.  They had a bunch of pieces of endings from other sources and no real way to fit them with this story, or no time to do that.

[3DandBeyond]

Argentoid wrote...


You're welcome to read my theory.

I did and it's not bad.  I've gone round and round wondering if all this actually physically takes place and have considered it possible it was all a mind-frack thing that was happening virtually.  And that's all well and good as far as the explosion goes in virtual land.  However, again it still doesn't make the emotion of the situation and the rest all fit with a real honest to goodness, Shepard lives ending.  I know that wasn't the intent of your theory at all since that was merely to explain the "reality" of the whole ending location.  But, at the core of all this is that what Shepard is told (if the kid is to be believed, but lacking any other explanation one has to go with what he says will happen), and what the end result is. 

The explosion that engulfs Shepard, whether real or within the reaper consciousness, helps to set a tone of disbelief that cannot be overcome emotionally as well as logically.  What you see and feel both agree and don't agree with each other.  For me, it's the belief that what we are shown is Shepard alive, so I know that but I also know and feel that does not make sense.  And it's the only ending that does that.  It creates this lack of a firm foundation which leads to frustration and really a sort of anger that something better wasn't done, and that would have been so easy.

It's kind of like that one video you have of Mark Meer just talking about incoherent ideas-that's how it feels and logically seems to me.  Like Jesus saved Lois Lane's life by turning back time and fighting pirates.  And that's supposed to make us all happy.

[3DandBeyond]

tickle267 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

 And then, Shepard in the most wonderful example of great gameplay in gaming history, must get up to point blank range to shoot the tube, in order to have the explosion engulf him/her.  Ok, I just saw Anderson get shot with the same gun from across the room and I shot TIM with it too, but it apparently no longer works from more than 3 feet away.  So, the flames engulf Shepard and should fry all remaining organic Shepard pieces.  

What? the explosion isn't that big...



oh wait...

Ha ha ha ha.  That's fantastic.  We all know Shepard was supposed to be larger than life itself, but ridiculous is ridiculous.  So rewarding to see the torso gasp after that.  Love it.

[Spartas Husky]

One of the reasons why I went for the IT,... is coz of that explosion. That thin is the size of a small town. Cover the entire presidium for god sakes.

Reminds me of Halo 4 and cortana he surviving a nuke coz... space magic hard light thingies.

[AlanC9]

Xilizhra wrote...
I'm saying that I wouldn't use the Reaper ground forces again, because of that exact problem. However, did anyone actually see the harvesting process?

Besides Shepard and his crew? Not that we know of, but there's a fair chance that some resistance fighters did at some point. A destroyed processor ship would probably make the method pretty clear.

[Xamufam]

3DandBeyond wrote...

tickle267 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

 And then, Shepard in the most wonderful example of great gameplay in gaming history, must get up to point blank range to shoot the tube, in order to have the explosion engulf him/her.  Ok, I just saw Anderson get shot with the same gun from across the room and I shot TIM with it too, but it apparently no longer works from more than 3 feet away.  So, the flames engulf Shepard and should fry all remaining organic Shepard pieces.  

What? the explosion isn't that big...



oh wait...

Ha ha ha ha.  That's fantastic.  We all know Shepard was supposed to be larger than life itself, but ridiculous is ridiculous.  So rewarding to see the torso gasp after that.  Love it.

more ridiculous things
can say the breath scene does not make any sense
This is an o'neill cylinder when it rotates it creates artificial gravity





Citadel exploaded that should drop the artificial atmosphere (No air)

"Gravity is simulated through rotation, and is a comfortable 1.02 standard G's on the Wards and a light 0.3 standard G's on the Presidium Ring."

"The Wards are open-topped, with skyscrapers rising from the
superstructure. Towers are sealed against vacuum, as the breathable
atmosphere envelope is only maintained to a height of about seven
meters. The atmosphere is contained by the centrifugal force of rotation
and a "membrane" of dense, colorless sulphur hexafluoride gas, held in
place by carefully managed mass effect fields."

Where do the gravity come from the citadel has stopped rotating"

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Citadel_space#Citadel_Space

When the citadel opens everyone on it would fly away

Modifié par Troxa, 23 avril 2013 - 04:03 .

[AlanC9]

Spartas Husky wrote...

One of the reasons why I went for the IT,... is coz of that explosion. That thin is the size of a small town. Cover the entire presidium for god sakes.

Not to mention that's one of the explosions that caused so many people to think that the whole galaxy was blown up by supernovas. Not one of Bio's best moments.

However, note that the ring structure isn't disintegrated or anything. It comes through the blast. So since Shepard's supposed to be in it, apparently...