drayfish wrote...
Used once... thoughout every cell in the entire universe, fundamentally reshaping the very fabric of reality.
Are you seriously comparing that with a 'big gun', and calling the gun unrealistic magic?
Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 09:41 .
David7204 wrote...
First of all, the energy from the Mass Relays exploding would be from the Mass Relays, not from the Crucible.
Secondly, that's just the Rule of Perception. The explosions have to bright, otherwise the player wouldn't even see them. So that shouldn't be considered evidence.
David7204 wrote...
drayfish wrote...
Used once... thoughout every cell in the entire universe, fundamentally reshaping the very fabric of reality.
Are you seriously comparing that with a 'big gun', and calling the gun unrealistic magic?
I don't like Synthesis one bit. I'd scrap it in an instant. But I least I can contend myself with thinking it's Reaper technology beyond our understanding. This? No. This is flatly impossible, and that's the end of it.
Modifié par IanPolaris, 11 mai 2013 - 09:43 .
IanPolaris wrote...
Players - The ending sucks and you should have done something about it.
Devs - Like what?
P - The ending takes away our choices.
D - You have both Paragon and Renegade outcomes.
No you don't. You have four choices (and the fourth is essentially a game over screen). Which of those choices you actually get depends only on a single number (EMS). The game is blind to how you get this EMS, so at this point your prior choices really don't matter....nor can you say that one choice is really paragon or renegade (other than the control ending epilog scene and that's ex-post-facto).
P - No, our CHOICES
D - So you want who you pick as your VS, who you romance and how you talk to characters to influence how this giant, intergalactic war ends?
P - ....we hate the starchild.
The starchild is the biggest single thing wrong with the ending. Don't believe me? Look at MEHEM where the starchild is removed entirely and the story goes much, much better. The starchild does not fit the overall theme or genre of Mass Effect. Never did. It also is asking us (as Shepard) to accept too much without any reason to trust the source or believe that it actually would work.
D - You don't like the Crucible? Why?
P - It's a DEM! It's a big "you win" button. Give us something else!
D - Like what?
P - A big-ass giant gun!
D - ....
P - A "conventional" way of winning. A big enough fleet!
D - That would go against ME1.
No it would not go against ME1 to allow a non-DEM way to beat the Reapers. We already know that the Reapers while extremely powerful are not invulnerable. For that matter the Reapers know it too. Else why would they try to decapitate the Galactic Govts each time they start to harvest? In principle, given sufficient technology, ships, clever tactics, etc, there is no reason to think the Reapers shouldn't be beatable without a magic off switch.
Why would the crucible have to be found at Mars. In fact given that the Alliance has known about Mars for more than thirty years, this makes finding the crucible there a huge posterior pull to say the least. However, if you HAD to have the crucible, finding the remnants of the old Prothean Crucible, or even fragments of it's plans as you fought the collectors, would have been an invaluable first step.
-Polaris
Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 09:49 .
David7204 wrote...
You know, funny thing Mr. Physicist. I just googled "Energy Invariance," and not a whole lot comes up. Mostly research papers. No Wikipedia entry or anything like that. It's clearly not a widely used term. That's awfully unusual for a professional physicist, wouldn't you say?
David7204 wrote...
drayfish wrote...
Used once... thoughout every cell in the entire universe, fundamentally reshaping the very fabric of reality.
Are you seriously comparing that with a 'big gun', and calling the gun unrealistic magic?
I don't like Synthesis one bit. I'd scrap it in an instant. But I least I can contend myself with thinking it's Reaper technology beyond our understanding. This? No. This is flatly impossible, and that's the end of it.
No! That is flatly impossible, and that's the end of it.
Modifié par drayfish, 11 mai 2013 - 09:50 .
Morlath wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
Players - The ending sucks and you should have done something about it.
Devs - Like what?
P - The ending takes away our choices.
D - You have both Paragon and Renegade outcomes.
No you don't. You have four choices (and the fourth is essentially a game over screen). Which of those choices you actually get depends only on a single number (EMS). The game is blind to how you get this EMS, so at this point your prior choices really don't matter....nor can you say that one choice is really paragon or renegade (other than the control ending epilog scene and that's ex-post-facto).
Renegade Control - www.youtube.com/watch
Paragon Control - www.youtube.com/watch
Different personalities, different words, different endings depending on if Shepard is paragon or renegade.
P - No, our CHOICES
D - So you want who you pick as your VS, who you romance and how you talk to characters to influence how this giant, intergalactic war ends?
P - ....we hate the starchild.
The starchild is the biggest single thing wrong with the ending. Don't believe me? Look at MEHEM where the starchild is removed entirely and the story goes much, much better. The starchild does not fit the overall theme or genre of Mass Effect. Never did. It also is asking us (as Shepard) to accept too much without any reason to trust the source or believe that it actually would work.
I believe that a good number of people don't like it and this clouds their judgement of the game. I'm also of the opinion that the Catalyst is poorly executed but not a terrible idea.
D - You don't like the Crucible? Why?
P - It's a DEM! It's a big "you win" button. Give us something else!
D - Like what?
P - A big-ass giant gun!
D - ....
P - A "conventional" way of winning. A big enough fleet!
D - That would go against ME1.
No it would not go against ME1 to allow a non-DEM way to beat the Reapers. We already know that the Reapers while extremely powerful are not invulnerable. For that matter the Reapers know it too. Else why would they try to decapitate the Galactic Govts each time they start to harvest? In principle, given sufficient technology, ships, clever tactics, etc, there is no reason to think the Reapers shouldn't be beatable without a magic off switch.
To start with, I don't consider the Crucible or Catalyst a DEM. But in answering your question, it took the entire Alliance fleet to take down one Reaper.
David7204 wrote...
Then you're simply stupid. Remember my example about the force over the distance? Technology can't change that.
You'd think if that was an actual term in use by actual phycisists, there would be a little more on it than that. Considering you can find articles on ridiculously obscure scientific terms on Wikipedia on all.
David7204 wrote...
If you think it's possible, maybe you should try flapping your arms and flying. I recommend doing it off a cliff. Remember, if anyone tells you it can't be done, it's because they're 'throwing a tantrum.'
IanPolaris wrote...
For your convenience, I am bolding some words in my original post. I don't consider this these differences to be meaningful.
A good number of people don't like it because it's horrible writing. That's pretty much the size of it (see understated nerdrage if you want to see a 40 minute video as to why it's thematically bad from a classic literature PoV). In of itself the Crucible/Catalyst is not a terrible idea. The Crucible is merely a plot-McGuffin (a Reaper Off Switch) and the Catalyst is the 'missing link'. I think this is lazy writing, but not terrible.
However, when the Catalyst stops from being a 'missing thing" to an Author's Protagonist/Voice, then it crosses the line into DEM and becomes unforgivable writing esp since it violates the theme and genre (Socratic Storytelling) that the Mass Effect trilogy had to this point.
BUT THEY DID DEFEAT IT Not only that, but remember that Sovereign was backed up by the entire Geth fleet as well. Once you know you can beat the a Reaper, then the rest is detail. Granted the devil often lurks in those details, but ME1 showed us that the Reapers could be beaten. I note again that the reapers themselves believe this, otherwise there would be no need to decapitate the galactic govt at the start of each harvesting cycle.
-Polaris
Mass Effect Codex...
A mass accelerator propels a solid metal slug using precisely-controlled electromagnetic attraction and repulsion. The slug is designed to squash or shatter on impact, increasing the energy it transfers to the target. If this were not the case, it would simply punch a hole right through, doing minimal damage.
Accelerator design was revolutionized by element zero. A slug lightened by a mass effect field can be accelerated to greater speeds, permitting projectile velocities that were previously unattainable. If accelerated to a high enough velocity, a simple paint chip can impact with the same destructive force as a nuclear weapon. However, mass accelerators produce recoil equal to their impact energy. This is mitigated somewhat by the mass effect fields that rounds are suspended within, but weapon recoil is still the prime limiting factor on slug velocity.
David7204 wrote...
Then you're simply stupid. Remember my example about the force over the distance? Technology can't change that.
You'd think if that was an actual term in use by actual phycisists, there would be a little more on it than that. Considering you can find articles on ridiculously obscure scientific terms on Wikipedia on all.
Modifié par drayfish, 11 mai 2013 - 10:18 .
Morlath wrote...
IanPolaris wrote...
For your convenience, I am bolding some words in my original post. I don't consider this these differences to be meaningful.
The fact you don't consider the differences meaningful does not stop the differences being there.
A good number of people don't like it because it's horrible writing. That's pretty much the size of it (see understated nerdrage if you want to see a 40 minute video as to why it's thematically bad from a classic literature PoV). In of itself the Crucible/Catalyst is not a terrible idea. The Crucible is merely a plot-McGuffin (a Reaper Off Switch) and the Catalyst is the 'missing link'. I think this is lazy writing, but not terrible.
However, when the Catalyst stops from being a 'missing thing" to an Author's Protagonist/Voice, then it crosses the line into DEM and becomes unforgivable writing esp since it violates the theme and genre (Socratic Storytelling) that the Mass Effect trilogy had to this point.
You're misusing the term McGuffin.
And a good number of opinions cross the line between "see what they were trying to do, bad why of introducing it" to "the whole thing is terrible, it sucks, it breaks the game"
The Leviathan dlc needed to be ingame, the Prothean AI needed to say that the Catalyst was "on/a part of" the Citadel" and it could have made the introduction smoother for people.
But it still doesn't make it a DEM. It's stated from the very beginning that the Cruible + Catalyst was a weapon that could, somehow, stop the Reapers but no one knew how but they were all desperate to try it. That's not just forshadowing, that's hitting the player over the head with the potential of a twist at the end.
BUT THEY DID DEFEAT IT Not only that, but remember that Sovereign was backed up by the entire Geth fleet as well. Once you know you can beat the a Reaper, then the rest is detail. Granted the devil often lurks in those details, but ME1 showed us that the Reapers could be beaten. I note again that the reapers themselves believe this, otherwise there would be no need to decapitate the galactic govt at the start of each harvesting cycle.
-Polaris
And the fact they defeated Sovereign adds to the argument that the Catalyst isn't a DEM (since it's not an impossiblity to kill them).
What is impossible is for there to be enough ships and air support in-game to do anything but turn the fight into a 50-50 contest. And of course a full-scale galactic dog fight would have totally shifted the type of game ME3 was.
Morlath wrote...
Mass Effect Codex...
A mass accelerator propels a solid metal slug using precisely-controlled electromagnetic attraction and repulsion. The slug is designed to squash or shatter on impact, increasing the energy it transfers to the target. If this were not the case, it would simply punch a hole right through, doing minimal damage.
Accelerator design was revolutionized by element zero. A slug lightened by a mass effect field can be accelerated to greater speeds, permitting projectile velocities that were previously unattainable. If accelerated to a high enough velocity, a simple paint chip can impact with the same destructive force as a nuclear weapon. However, mass accelerators produce recoil equal to their impact energy. This is mitigated somewhat by the mass effect fields that rounds are suspended within, but weapon recoil is still the prime limiting factor on slug velocity.
So conservation of energy is still plays a part.
Modifié par Archonsg, 11 mai 2013 - 10:23 .
Archonsg wrote...
Bickering aside, interesting stuff on physics there. ;-)
Here's something I want to throw out to our physicists out there.
Please correct if I am wrong.
Signals used to trigger or activate an object or cause an effect are by nature defined energy, meaning that they are measurable, and once understood can be replicated and amplified. Correct?
Reason I ask is, if this is so, and from the codex entries, we know that the Leviathan orbs are instruments whereby a signal is passed onto, used against other organics and more importantly, kill or disable a Reaper.
Wouldn't it hace been a very logical and militarily sound choice to deploy these orbs carried by drones (they can be manufactured if I remember the codex entry, not at home at the moment so can't check up on this) by the thousands and then have these orbs rebroadcast the Leviathan signal to either shut down or at the very least disrupt Reaper capabilities?
As Polaris points out, the abilities or lack of at this point of either forces are not "factual" but are based on plot.
So coming back to my question, given that the fact that this signal exist, and that there are means to employ this signal which confirms an "off switch" built into Reper forces?
Why is it not made the focus of, instead of an unknown that is the Crucible?
David7204 wrote...
No, we don't know that. It was the Leviathan itself that took out the Reaper. Not the orbs.
Modifié par Archonsg, 11 mai 2013 - 10:51 .
A 18th / 19th century army could probably take out one single modern tank too. If you're going to have the Reapers beatable you also have to come up with a convincing explanation as to why they've curbstomped every previous cycle. Hitting the Citadel first would be an important but hardly completely necessary step.To start with, I don't consider the Crucible or Catalyst a DEM. But in answering your question, it took the entire Alliance fleet to take down one Reaper.
.
BUT THEY DID DEFEAT IT Not only that, but remember that Sovereign was backed up by the entire Geth fleet as well. Once you know you can beat the a Reaper, then the rest is detail. Granted the devil often lurks in those details, but ME1 showed us that the Reapers could be beaten. I note again that the reapers themselves believe this, otherwise there would be no need to decapitate the galactic govt at the start of each harvesting cycle
Modifié par Reorte, 11 mai 2013 - 10:52 .
Modifié par David7204, 11 mai 2013 - 10:53 .
Retour en haut