probably because the apparent protagonist had N7 plastered all over him.
The person in the trailer or.... ?
probably because the apparent protagonist had N7 plastered all over him.
Whether you want to believe it or not, Death is really a disease.
LOLWUT?
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
LOLWUT?
I see you're still at it, Well, Somethings never change.
I see you're still at it, Well, Somethings never change.
do you really wanna get into a philosophical debate about death? Death, my pretty, is the cessation of all biological functions as a RESULT OF diseases and other factors.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
do you really wanna get into a philosophical debate about death? Death, my pretty, is the cessation of all biological functions as a RESULT OF diseases and other factors.
The causes of death was never a "Philosophical" subject, It's entirely and fully scientific. Death itself, Naturally happens because the human cells get old and they lost their ability to multiply over time. It's been a while since i last researched the subject and i might miss a few details. We have many theories to why the cells age and very recently, Scientists have managed to reverse aging in human cell line. Means that they made an older cell become younger. We're still far away from reaching the depth of those studies though, These are just first steps. But the point reamins intact, Nothing about death is neither spiritual or philosophical.
I see you're still at it, Well, Somethings never change.
Why you take things personally, L8S?
Skylar, I can tell you in real life, having taken care of one patient with a brain that suffered anoxic injury and another that's completely brain dead, that no matter how "intact" your brain is, it's dead.
That's especially true for the latter patient, where death isn't a disease that needs to be treated. Rather, it's an expected outcome with palliative end-of-life care is provided.
So, the helmet explanation is BS. Poor research on the writers' parts just to justify why they're bringing Shepard back from the dead.
The causes of death was never a "Philosophical" subject, It's entirely and fully scientific. Death itself, Naturally happens because the human cells get old and they lost their ability to multiply over time. It's been a while since i last researched the subject and i might miss a few details. We have many theories to why the cells age and very recently, Scientists have managed to reverse aging in human cell line. Means that they made an older cell become younger. We're still far away from reaching the depth of those studies though, These are just first steps. But the point reamins intact, Nothing about death is neither spiritual or philosophical.
There are million ways to die, L8S. You're talking about senescence, not actual death secondary to disease or trauma. That is not what happened to Shepard.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Why you take things personally, L8S?
Skylar, I can tell you in real life, having taken care of one patient with a brain that suffered anoxic injury and another that's completely brain dead, that no matter how "intact" your brain is, it's dead.
That's especially true for the latter patient, where death isn't a disease that needs to be treated. Rather, it's an expected outcome with palliative end-of-life care is provided.
So, the helmet explanation is BS. Poor research on the writers' parts just to justify why they're bringing Shepard back from the dead.
What you're trying to say, And what many of you here are trying to say is all based on contemprary medicine. I get it, I swear i get it, We're not able to do that right now, But in the future we will and as i have said in my pervious posts, We're starting to make progress. Actually, It was never an explanation, There was never one, It's just a hint, The full process was never revealed.
There are million ways to die, L8S. You're talking about senescence, not actual death secondary to disease or trauma. That is not what happened to Shepard.
I know, He wanted to discuss the idea of natural death, So, I discussed it. Shepard didn't die naturally, That's surely correct, But that doesn't mean that his body can't be reconstructed. The problem here is the brain, And The game didn't give much details about it, For a good reason. But i think it's still plausible.
So, the helmet explanation is BS. Poor research on the writers' parts just to justify why they're bringing Shepard back from the dead.
I wished Shepard wasn't in the Alliance or a Marine anymore but a rogue dude with a frigate who's tying to find a solution but everyone is hostile toward him (including the Alliance) because of past association.
Hopefully, we won't be a soldier in ME:A.
Technically, it's the "how" that's getting explained, not the "why."
I like your brain.
Let us fondue.

ugh knock this stupid topic off, or take it to ME2 where it actually belongs. Shepard don't appear to matter much in ME4.
Nope. It was never too real. It was always science fiction.
It was always a game. Nothing like Mass Effect going on in real life... at least not in my reality.
Mass Effect games were the most fun I'd had playing a vid game in my history.
It drew me into its story and I have feelings for the characters. Those feelings don't make it real, because I also have fondness for my favorite book characters. The book characters are not real. Shepard and crew... not real.
... hope no-one's serious about this fantastic work of entertainment being "real".
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks that.
The big thing Dark Energy had going for it was that it didn't feel like a retread of old material. After spending most of ME2 and 3 learning that synthetics and organics could cooperate, having the Reapers' motive be "we don't think Synthetics and Organics can cooperate" is a bit like listening to the sound of a deflating balloon. It certainly didn't help that the Organic-Synthetic concept felt like a sub-plot whose importance was raised to have galaxy-altering decisions at the last second.
I'll take ME3's "realism" over ME2's complete lack thereof any day of the week.
I've heard a lot of complaints, but this is by far the most confusing to me. In contrast to ME1, ME2 and ME3 felt less "real" to me because of it's sudden focus on Shepard being more of a force of nature than a talented soldier. The first game was far more "Hard Sci-Fi" than its successors in my opinion. ME2 was fun, episodic, and it's structure flowed more like a television show than a war movie, which ME3 felt like. That being said, in the previous titles, most of the enemies were mercenaries or thugs, who weren't always trained soldiers or organized military outfits, and the Collectors never spoke. Mass Effect 3 has armies of all species fighting for their homes, their planets, and their lives. It was a war for their very existence and it sounded like it.
No.
It didn't become too real, it became too US american. Too patriotic, too militaristic... if anything, it became closer to the CODs, BFs and other soldier games out there.
The writing changed and is inconsistent, so that may account for the felt changes, too.
Lolwut? What's wrong with America, or patriotism again? H8ters gonna h8te m8.
I wished Shepard wasn't in the Alliance or a Marine anymore but a rogue dude with a frigate who's tying to find a solution but everyone is hostile toward him (including the Alliance) because of past association.
Hopefully, we won't be a soldier in ME:A.
But how would this be resolved without being an even bigger asspull than what we got? The problem with Shepard being a rogue agent is that the whole reaper thing still has to be solved somehow. Now, if the Crucible remains as a plot device, then Shepard needs support to get it built. Shepard would not have been able to assault Cronos station without the Alliance. Even if Shepard isn't technically part of the military anymore, s/he'd still be running military operations in coordination with more military forces, so what's the difference?
Most of the game would have to be rewritten to resolve this, since some of the plot relies on Shepard's reinstatement into both the Alliance military and the Spectres.
The big thing Dark Energy had going for it was that it didn't feel like a retread of old material. After spending most of ME2 and 3 learning that synthetics and organics could cooperate, having the Reapers' motive be "we don't think Synthetics and Organics can cooperate" is a bit like listening to the sound of a deflating balloon. It certainly didn't help that the Organic-Synthetic concept felt like a sub-plot whose importance was raised to have galaxy-altering decisions at the last second.
Hammer -> head of nail.
There are great classics that deal with that theme in a tasteful way - Deus Ex, Blade Runner, Hyperion, etc. If you gonna try to emulate their success, at least make an effort to understand why they worked, not just copy-paste some random parts...
Lolwut? What's wrong with America, or patriotism again? H8ters gonna h8te m8.
Personally, I find the idea of patriotism a bit immature in the context of a globalized world. Which is what we have today, and the background of Mass Effect Earthlings is exponentialy more globalistic.
Did Mass Effect become too real at some point, according to you?
Hmmm, series set in the far future with alien races and physics-defying technology...
Nope, that's not too real in my book... ![]()
I think the series got less realistic, to be honest. It was a trend that started with ME2, if you ask me, and in many ways, I find some of the second's game content more lacking in realism than ME3.
The series did however, become more "bleak" in ME3. Because of the Reaper War, the universe was a darker place, and that's something that you could really feel in ME3.
In contrast, ME2 was a far more colorful game, both in level design and atmosphere.
However, even though I feel the series did become less realistic, I still like both ME2 and ME3. At times, I can even appreciate that ME2 tried to do with the universe, even if I felt the execution could have been better.