831 réponses à ce sujet

[Sion1138]

You'll have to show you work on that 1:1. 

 

I'm not sure what you're saying there.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Do people want them to try and canonize an ending? Or try to work with the mess that was ME3's finale?

 

This is better. Fresh characters, setting with the same familiar races and universe we love. This is actually exactly what I hoped for. Basically a reboot without being a reboot

Destroy with enough galactic readiness was perfectly capable of continuing the story. Hell, even control could work (it is basically the same). The only "mess" that ME3 left, was all the whining kids, who didn't get their happy ending.

[Sion1138]

Every sci-fi setting has it's own gibberish.. and people are willing to suspend belief as long as it's consistent. But break consistency and it'll just ****** them off. It bursts the bubble. These stories only work as long as people believe they're in the bubble.

 

Yeah, and to shift the subject back, I think this consistency argument also works for the narrative.

 

As in, suddenly cutting a continuous narrative off, jumping far ahead in time and space kind of bursts the bubble for me.

[dreamgazer]

I'm not sure what you're saying there.

 

Explain why they're comparable, why they're 1 for 1. 

 

You also can't revive the dead, but that didn't stop ME2. And like I said, there's a significant difference between allergies and a collapsed immune system - they are oftentimes the product of actually contrary mechanics (at least at a high level) - but that didn't stop ME1-3 from butchering immunology. 

It's part for the course for the series. 

 

How is traveling back in time on the same level as tissue revitalization/cloning and wonky immune systems? 

 

I dislike Lazarus and its brain death stupidity quite a bit, but even I think it's much more credible than throttling back in time just to roll the dice on any number of paradoxes. 

[Saul Iscariot]

It is, but that doesn't mean there isn't a significant difference between going fast and going backwards.

 

As time has been shown to be a constant, be it the perceived notion of past, present or future, time travel doesn't actually mean going backwards or forwards, just transplanting yourself to another point you are incapable of being in ordinarily. The Reapers could, under our current understanding of physics, travel to another neighbouring galaxy in 250 years or so. It doesn't take a great deal to work out that ME technology would still be present in such a short span. It even allows for some easy revisions.

[Sion1138]

Explain why they're comparable, why they're 1 for 1. 

 

They're both equally impossible.

[Iakus]

Every sci-fi setting has it's own gibberish.. and people are willing to suspend disbelief as long as it's consistent. But break consistency and it'll just ****** them off. It bursts the bubble. These stories only work as long as people believe they're in the bubble.

 

So much this

[dreamgazer]

They're both impossible.

 

So are many, many, many other things,  yet we're constantly making advances in speed and propulsion capabilities. That excuse doesn't cut it. 

[Sion1138]

So are many, many, many other things, and we're constantly making advances in speed and propulsion capabilities. That excuse doesn't cut it. 

 

It's not an excuse, and propulsion has nothing to do with it.

 

It's logically impossible.

 

Two logically impossible things are equivalent. You don't differentiate between them.

 

As in saying: Oh, well this one thing certainly is impossible but not as impossible as the other.

 

Or one thing is infinite but not as infinite as the other. They're both infinite, 1:1.

[In Exile]

Explain why they're comparable, why they're 1 for 1.


How is traveling back in time on the same level as tissue revitalization/cloning and wonky immune systems?

I dislike Lazarus and its brain death stupidity quite a bit, but even I think it's much more credible than throttling back in time just to roll the dice on any number of paradoxes.

Because it's equally impossible. I get armchair biology isn't something people care as much about as armchair physics, but it's actually all nonsense and gibberish. I don't see how 'incomprehensible plot' because of an ignorance of biology is better than 'incomprehensible plot' because of time travel.

You're wrong in saying it's more credible. It's not.

[Saul Iscariot]

There is a fundamental difference. Time travel is theoretically possible, but a whole host of trouble. In the ME universe it is 'more' possible due to the nature of the advancements in technology. With the reanimation sequence from ME2 there wasn't even a contrived attempt to explain the resurrection of the personality. 

[dreamgazer]

It's not an excuse, and propulsion has nothing to do with it.

It doesn't? That's the issue we're attempting to resolve here.
 

It's logically impossible.

So, anything and everything impossible is permissible in this universe, and therefore equal?
 

Two logically impossible things are equivalent. You don't differentiate between them.

Why not? Why aren't there degrees of impossibility?

One involves a bullshit element and discharge method that could be replicated by something, anything, else in the future to achieve the same results. The other involves a method of traversing time and breaking physics/energy that relies on frequently discredited theoretical musings.

I do not see the two as comparable whatsoever.

[dreamgazer]

Because it's equally impossible. I get armchair biology isn't something people care as much about as armchair physics, but it's actually all nonsense and gibberish. I don't see how 'incomprehensible plot' because of an ignorance of biology is better than 'incomprehensible plot' because of time travel.

You're wrong in saying it's more credible. It's not.

Can't say I agree. Modern science has at least made advancements in rejuvenating dead brain tissue and in lifting memory markers from DNA. Doesn't make Lazarus any smarter, but at least you can find something on that front to work up a feasible explanation. Nothing of the sort exists for time travel.

[RZIBARA]

Destroy with enough galactic readiness was perfectly capable of continuing the story. Hell, even control could work (it is basically the same). The only "mess" that ME3 left, was all the whining kids, who didn't get their happy ending.

 

A cano destroy ending would have been good, but this isnt as bad as many people are making it out to be

[BabyPuncher]

Boy, how convenient that this thread is suddenly full of experts on theoretical physics! I never would have guessed that people were so well educated in science overwhelmingly obscure to the layman! Wow!

 

I don't like time travel at all, but it has nothing to do with how plausible it may or may not be in the real world.

[BabyPuncher]

Or one thing is infinite but not as infinite as the other. They're both infinite, 1:1.

 

This is flat-out untrue.

 

Mathematics recognizes different 'degrees' of infinity. Look up George Cantor, who pioneered most of the work.
 

[Saul Iscariot]

I'm sorry Mr Puncher, but my interest in Einstein and Feynman means I am familiar with the concept of all of time simultaneously existing. What is being discussed here ignores that idea, yet it favours the idea that your personality and experiences are recorded in your DNA to a point that they can be reproduced. Sure, there are ingrained responses that we all share as a species. But they are not the same as reproducing a person from scratch. As I mentioned, ME2 never explains how Shepard was recreated whole. It isn't impossible, just avoided.

 

Whereas the time travel thing fits in with the existing technology of the Relays. It is really a problem as it is always illustrated as an act of motion when you see a ship travel from one system to another. Also as I said previously, we know that Reaper craft could travel to a neighbouring galaxy in a few centuries. This means that Andromeda doesn't need to be in a time where spectacular advancements, be it in technology, socially, politically or philosophicaly, are made.

[EmperorSahlertz]

A cano destroy ending would have been good, but this isnt as bad as many people are making it out to be

Oh, I agree. I am actually looking forward to this. But they could've continued on in the Milky Way if they wanted.

[Steelcan]

A cano destroy ending would have been good, but this isnt as bad as many people are making it out to be

I see aboslutely nothing positive in writers being cowards or incompetent

 

throw in the writer of the disaster known as Halo 4, keep Super!Mac on also.

 

The one good thing I've heard is that Dumbrow is back

[Sion1138]

This is flat-out untrue.

 

Mathematics recognizes different 'degrees' of infinity. Look up George Cantor, who pioneered most of the work.
 

 

Yeah, logically and mathematically are not always the same thing.

 

But I didn't want to argue about that at all. I was asked to.

 

I like time travel, the other person doesn't. If it had stopped there I would have been fine with it.

[AlanC9]

The destroy ending could have been canon, the others a "fail" (indoctrination/death) and the opening would have been Shepard waking up on the battlefield. War still raging. And then Bioware could have delivered the ending the trilogy deserved: a united galaxy kicking reaper butts without committing genocide and generally getting a raw deal. Hell, they could have fixed it in an epic DLC if they went to so much trouble with an extended cut icing on a pile of crap. But they were too proud. They preferred torching their franchise and asking us to pretend the ending bullshit never happened.

Well, it'd work for you. For me this would have been an absolute dealbreaker.