3595 réponses à ce sujet

[correctamundo]

Oh yeah smudboy, long winding intro only to stumble on the first point. When Mr Smudboy enters the bar it feels as if someone fun just left =D.

[KrrKs]

[...] The most you can go off of is that the shiny core disappears right before the Relay explodes in the EC cutscene. I don't know if it does that without EC. But again, that is what you see in a cutscene after you make the choice. Shepard never sees that.

 

I never noticed that before!

It's the same in the original ending, btw.

[gothpunkboy89]

How do you know somebody wouldn't willingly blow one up? What about terrorists or someone trying to close off entry into their territory?

 

You're right, the Supernova is a lot more powerful. But we know the energy dissipates and from what I could find, only planets within a certain radius are utterly destroyed with others being ejected, just like what happened to the Mu Relay. Normally a Relay sized object would not be as tough as a planet, but we don't know how powerful those Quantum Shields are or if they can ever be broken until Arrival.

And then you ruin it with your usual ignorance of the real world. The major damage from a bullet is not the kinetic energy of impact; it's from the expansion of the round and gasses inside the body.

 

 

 

No it's not because you have no idea what the beam is or what is needed to make it. The most you can go off of is that the shiny core disappears right before the Relay explodes in the EC cutscene. I don't know if it does that without EC. But again, that is what you see in a cutscene after you make the choice. Shepard never sees that.

 

My signature guys Mr.Btongue and Smudboy describe it well.

 

 

Because blowing one up would isolate completely. No ship and no person would be able to reach it. The equivalent of stranding yourself on pluto with our current level of space travel tech. Considering there are better alternatives including setting ships up to block aid the area or simply fleeing to some were else in space.

 

Doesn't have to be a tough as a planet just doesn't need to bend when the energy wave hits it. Since is would spread the impact out across the whole thing it is conceivable it would survive.

 

Claims major damage from a bullet is not from kinetic energy of impact. Claims round expands in the body. Tell me how does the round expand in the body? Why not before? What does bullet proof vests designed to do?

 

Your signature guys show just as much bias as you. It is very nice you found someone who thinks just like you and uploaded it to youtube. But having a youtube video doesn't make their statements anymore valid then yours. I have no idea what is up with people lately thinking that if they find one person with a youtube video it some how acts as supporting proof of their ideas. 

 

 

For reference you are Phil Daoust in the song.

 

Does this now make me right? I mean I have a youtube video to support my statement about how little I think about your ability to form an argument.

Modifié par gothpunkboy89, 09 mai 2016 - 02:00 .

[angol fear]

No, it doesn't. The attack plan requires using new, unknown technology, TIM magically gets to the Citadel and can control Shepard and Anderson's motor functions, and the Catalyst makes claims that are unsupported if not outright subverted by the story.  The expectations of the players were built upon the prior story.

 

The attack plan requires new technology because they wanted the galaxy to be unprepared, if you didn't see it coming... Mass Effect 1 and 2 are made to have an unprepared galaxy.

What the TIM event has to do with what we are talking about. I'm talking about the intentions that shape the structure and you are talking about details that are not a problem. And what the catalyst says is supported by the narration, you only didn't see it, or you don't want to see it.

The expectations of the players isn't built on what was here before, it was built on what he think was here before. He only based his understanding on what he have already seen somewhere else. Why is there so many people who want a happy ending? Why is there so many people who don't want an ending that makes the player think? Because they were thinking that it was some basic (and stupid) game while there was so many subtles clues. You only have to see how many people would like (or be ok with) the crucible to be a superweapon that kills the reapers. These people didn't really play the game, they never really read properly the game and they want to impose their point of view which is the pure Hollywood movie. Great!

[Iakus]

Any argument using the original ending isn't valid anymore. Particularly since EC was the second DLC to be released just over a month from the game's release.

It was released three months after ME3's release.

 

And was clearly rushed even then.

[gothpunkboy89]

It was released three months after ME3's release.

 

And was clearly rushed even then.

 

And yet it was still released within 3 months which would mean anyone trying to use anything that existed before it as an example of anything isn't really valid.

[Monica21]

And yet it was still released within 3 months which would mean anyone trying to use anything that existed before it as an example of anything isn't really valid.

From my understanding it was released because fans were asking legitimate questions like, hey, how did my squadmates get on board the Normandy, and hey, doesn't an exploding relay destroy a star system? Bioware was trying to address inconsistencies with the ending, and while the ending makes more sense, it's still only marginally better than it was. I've seen video of the pre-EC ending and I can't imagine how confusing it would have been to play through that.

So actually, it is valid because the pre-EC ending is Bioware's original vision for how the series ended. Fans had to be the ones to point out the inconsistencies. The writers just sort of forgot what the relay did to the Bahak system, I guess. Or didn't care and didn't take the time to let players know why this destruction of a relay would be different from Arrival.

[gothpunkboy89]

From my understanding it was released because fans were asking legitimate questions like, hey, how did my squadmates get on board the Normandy, and hey, doesn't an exploding relay destroy a star system? Bioware was trying to address inconsistencies with the ending, and while the ending makes more sense, it's still only marginally better than it was. I've seen video of the pre-EC ending and I can't imagine how confusing it would have been to play through that.

So actually, it is valid because the pre-EC ending is Bioware's original vision for how the series ended. Fans had to be the ones to point out the inconsistencies. The writers just sort of forgot what the relay did to the Bahak system, I guess. Or didn't care and didn't take the time to let players know why this destruction of a relay would be different from Arrival.

 

And again you miss the over all point. They did release the EC ending. Much like rubbing ground tiger penis on your body to increase sexual desire that should be in the past since we learned actual medicine and how to deal with or identify fertility/sexual desire being reduced.

 

So I will ask again why to people continue to rub ground tiger penis on them selves when we have viagra and a variety of other similar things?

[Natureguy85]

Because blowing one up would isolate completely. No ship and no person would be able to reach it. The equivalent of stranding yourself on pluto with our current level of space travel tech. Considering there are better alternatives including setting ships up to block aid the area or simply fleeing to some were else in space.

 

My exact example was someone who wanted to isolate their system. You wouldn't be stranding yourself on Pluto, you'd be stranding yourself inside the Sol system. Stop making analogies. You don't know how they work.  Those alternatives might be viable, and they might not be. It would depend on things like the technology difference and aggressiveness of the "locals" and whoever they are trying to isolate themselves from.

 

 

Doesn't have to be a tough as a planet just doesn't need to bend when the energy wave hits it. Since is would spread the impact out across the whole thing it is conceivable it would survive.

 

True, but we're talking about one of if not the most powerful emissions of energy in the universe.

 

 

 

 

Claims major damage from a bullet is not from kinetic energy of impact. Claims round expands in the body. Tell me how does the round expand in the body? Why not before? What does bullet proof vests designed to do?

 

I didn't make it clear enough that I was focusing on the impact because the asteroid hitting and smashing through a rigid object is not like bullets. As you pointed out above, the Relay is a relatively rigid object being smashed. Human tissue isn't like that. Vests not only take the kinetic energy, but they prevent penetration. Yes, bullets can expand or shatter in the body. Go look up what hollow point rounds are. This is to keep them from simply passing through. It's not the impact as much as that energy being dispersed into and damaging a wider area of tissues.

 

Plus, there's the pressure effects. Try shooting an empty milk jug and one filled with water and you'll see a big difference.

 

Now we're talking about standard bullets here. Most people killed by guns in the US are killed by handguns. There are different types of rounds that work differently.

 

 

 

 

Your signature guys show just as much bias as you. It is very nice you found someone who thinks just like you and uploaded it to youtube. But having a youtube video doesn't make their statements anymore valid then yours. I have no idea what is up with people lately thinking that if they find one person with a youtube video it some how acts as supporting proof of their ideas. 

 

Does this now make me right? I mean I have a youtube video to support my statement about how little I think about your ability to form an argument.

 

That I or someone else came to a different conclusion than you isn't prima facie evidence of bias.  Having the video doesn't make him or me right; the content and the arguments within do. Surely, even you can grasp that concept. Your ridiculous question shows just how desperately you're scrambling to find any possible argument.against those of us who understand these things better than you do.

 

And what about the other things, particularly the analysis of the literature professor?

 

 

The attack plan requires new technology because they wanted the galaxy to be unprepared, if you didn't see it coming... Mass Effect 1 and 2 are made to have an unprepared galaxy.

What the TIM event has to do with what we are talking about. I'm talking about the intentions that shape the structure and you are talking about details that are not a problem. And what the catalyst says is supported by the narration, you only didn't see it, or you don't want to see it.

The expectations of the players isn't built on what was here before, it was built on what he think was here before. He only based his understanding on what he have already seen somewhere else. Why is there so many people who want a happy ending? Why is there so many people who don't want an ending that makes the player think? Because they were thinking that it was some basic (and stupid) game while there was so many subtles clues. You only have to see how many people would like (or be ok with) the crucible to be a superweapon that kills the reapers. These people didn't really play the game, they never really read properly the game and they want to impose their point of view which is the pure Hollywood movie. Great!

 

I didn't make it clear but I was referring to the Citadel beam, not the Crucible. That's an entire different issue. The galaxy was plenty unprepared and that had nothing to do with the Citadel beam. This technology had no military application, but is simply a transport for bodies.

I'm really tired of being told I missed something or didn't get it by people who can't explain what was supposedly so deep and thought provoking.  People wanted the Crucible to be a super weapon because the entire goal was to destroy the Reapers. I would be fine with it not being that but somehow it's just a giant battery that works with things already on the Citadel, including a tube that destroys them when shot and a mechanism to upload an organic mind for some reason. The Reapers have been telling us since ME2 that they were actually the good guys and then we get their stupid reason and can't reject it.

 

 

 

And yet it was still released within 3 months which would mean anyone trying to use anything that existed before it as an example of anything isn't really valid.

 

It is when examining original authorial intent. Pre-EC is what they really wanted to say and the EC was in response to fan outcry. Both can be looked at for different things.

 

 

 

And again you miss the over all point. They did release the EC ending. Much like rubbing ground tiger penis on your body to increase sexual desire that should be in the past since we learned actual medicine and how to deal with or identify fertility/sexual desire being reduced.

 

So I will ask again why to people continue to rub ground tiger penis on them selves when we have viagra and a variety of other similar things?

 

Your mind goes to weird places. I think you need help.

[Natureguy85]

Oh yeah smudboy, long winding intro only to stumble on the first point. When Mr Smudboy enters the bar it feels as if someone fun just left =D.

 

Ha, yeah he has a rather dry delivery most of the time. What was the "first point" on which he stumbled? The first point in the video I linked was on the Crucible and is correct.

[rossler]

And is not a replacement for Mass Relys. It will take decades and centuries to cross distances the Relays covered instantaneously.

 

The galaxy was dependent on the mass relays. The Reapers made them, and you used their technology that was too advanced for your own good. By taking them away, you are allowed to develop things yourself without relying on the Reapers advanced technology as a crutch. Unfortunately, people here think we need the Reapers, and all their advanced technology, otherwise the galaxy would come to a screeching halt and everyone would die. 

 

Exactly. That had to be added into the EC to deal with this problem. You apparently lost track of how this discussion started.

 

Mmmm, nope. There was a conversation in London stating this is temporary and all this stuff can be rebuilt. So the Hackett line was to remind you again. In addition to numerous other times. Like on the Thessia mission, etc, etc. If you think Hackett saying it in the Extended Cut was the first time you heard it in the game, you need to start paying attention.

 

The Protheans had a prototype that worked one way.  Was there another?

 

Not that I know of.

 

The bottom line is you don't know that when you make a decision, so I absolutely can. When the Catalyst says every choice "will destroy the Mass Relays", all you have to go off of is Arrival. Arrival had only two things of narrative value

 

1) Establishing that Relays can be destroyed and that it will wipe out the galaxy

 

2) A real chat with Harbinger

 

Neither of these were used for anything. They altered the Relay cutscene with the EC to show the Relays merely falling apart rather than violently exploding partially to cover this problem.

 

Beam is not the same thing as a rock. Besides, if you have to rely on the dialogue and cutscenes, it kind of shows that people can't put 2+2 together and connect dots. I mean, it wasn't a rock that destroyed the relays, it was a energy beam, which would have different implications, but because the game doesn't spell this out for people, they say it's narratively inconsistent.

 

I mean, Force=Mass * Acceleration. So a giant asteroid weighs a lot, while an energy beam might travel fast, but it doesn't have much weight. So it wouldn't have the same result as what Arrival states.

 

What do you think would have more of a devastating impact? Dropping a TV off the roof of my place and letting it fall to the concrete? Or dropping metal spoon? The metal spoon would be intact with a few dents, but the TV would have it's panel shattered and other components destroyed. 

 

There was also the part about how, depending on the EMS, the Crucible will be considered largely complete, or severely damaged. So it might destroy more things with a lower EMS. It doesn't always destroy the galaxy.

[Natureguy85]

The galaxy was dependent on the mass relays. The Reapers made them, and you used their technology that was too advanced for your own good. By taking them away, you are allowed to develop things yourself without relying on the Reapers advanced technology as a crutch.

 

I agree and that's great in the long term. However, colonies that were dependent on the Relays for supplies will die. There aren't garden worlds all over the place.

 

 

 

Mmmm, nope. There was a conversation in London stating this is temporary and all this stuff can be rebuilt. So the Hackett line was to remind you again. A second time.

 

What conversation was that? I don't remember it. Please tell me who it was with and either quote it or link a video.

 

 

 

Not that I know of.

 

Ok so your claim that "Some species already had a working version of their own mass relay," is incorrect. One species had a prototype. That's an amazing step but it's not the same as creating your own full Relay and linking it to the network or pairing it with another built one. We don't know how far the Protheans were away. They are gone and the Council Races didn't seem to glean anything from Ilos or the Relay that we've seen. Maybe getting to Andromeda will have something to do with it.

 

Hackett also says "it will take time." And it will be a LONG time because Relays work in pairs. You not only have to fix the Charon Relay, but you have to get to the next Relay some other way, presumably FTL, to fix that Relay, and do that for the entire network.

[rossler]

I agree and that's great in the long term. However, colonies that were dependent on the Relays for supplies will die. There aren't garden worlds all over the place.

 

Victory over the Reapers through the sacrifice of others.

 

What conversation was that? I don't remember it. Please tell me who it was with and either quote it or link a video.

 

Just replay the Thessia mission.

 

Hackett also says "it will take time." And it will be a LONG time because Relays work in pairs. You not only have to fix the Charon Relay, but you have to get to the next Relay some other way, presumably FTL, to fix that Relay, and do that for the entire network.

 

Perhaps the galaxy just wasn't ready for mass relay travel.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I'm really tired of being told I missed something or didn't get it by people who can't explain what was supposedly so deep and thought provoking.  People wanted the Crucible to be a super weapon because the entire goal was to destroy the Reapers. I would be fine with it not being that but somehow it's just a giant battery that works with things already on the Citadel, including a tube that destroys them when shot and a mechanism to upload an organic mind for some reason. The Reapers have been telling us since ME2 that they were actually the good guys and then we get their stupid reason and can't reject it.

 

"People wanted this.." "People were expecting that..." Don't these arguments go the other way. Like how do we know the ending isn't what pro-enders wanted or expected? And how do we know it is what fits within the rest of the game? I thought these were things were resolved by actual arguments; not just one person saying he's right and everyone who disagrees with him is wrong.

[Natureguy85]

Victory over the Reapers through the sacrifice of others.el.

 

Yeah, and that's certainly one way to go with the consequences of the ending. But that's a LOT of others, still including a lot of the victory fleet. And all the other planets will be without all of those ships for a long time. But the entire reason they changed the ending with the EC to include that line from Hackett is to deal with the consequences of no Relays. My point is that one line saying "we can rebuild everything that was lost" doesn't really solve it if you actually think about it. But if you just take it as "everyone lived happily ever after," then it's fine.

 

 

Just replay the Thessia mission.

 

 

 

Mmmm, nope. There was a conversation in London stating this is temporary and all this stuff can be rebuilt. So the Hackett line was to remind you again. In addition to numerous other times. Like on the Thessia mission, etc, etc. If you think Hackett saying it in the Extended Cut was the first time you heard it in the game, you need to start paying attention.

 

There's a London on Thessia too? Cool! Just kidding. Anyway, you're the one making the argument. Present your evidence.

 

 

Perhaps the galaxy just wasn't ready for mass relay travel.

 

What is this supposed to mean? They already had Mass Relay Travel. Are you trying to mirror the idea that the Krogans were not ready for uplift?

[Ithurael]

"People wanted this.." "People were expecting that..." Don't these arguments go the other way. Like how do we know the ending isn't what pro-enders wanted or expected? And how do we know it is what fits within the rest of the game? I thought these were things were resolved by actual arguments; not just one person saying he's right and everyone who disagrees with him is wrong.

 

I Know Right! Everyone who disagrees with me is Wrong since I - and I alone via my interpretation - have derived the authors intent by looking at the material!

https://www.google.c...=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

 

 

Intentional Fallacy

(in literary theory) the fallacy of basing an assessment of a work on the author's intention rather than on one's response to the actual work.

 

All of Y'all got nuthin on me!!!

[rossler]

But if you just take it as "everyone lived happily ever after," then it's fine.

 

If you don't want me to see it as that, then you shouldn't post about the lack of mass relays or fast travel would doom many colonies, etc.

 

There's a London on Thessia too? Cool! Just kidding. Anyway, you're the one making the argument. Present your evidence.

 

If the part in London was a chapter in the story, I'm telling you to go re-read that chapter or replay that level. I'm not however, going to tell you the exact line or section of the level the answer you seek is in. I already listed a couple freebies with the Crucible and it's effects, but I want you to work for your answers, instead of relying others to do it for you.

 

What is this supposed to mean? They already had Mass Relay Travel. Are you trying to mirror the idea that the Krogans were not ready for uplift?

 

It goes back to my thing about using technology that's too advanced for your own good. Shepard mentions this during the final level.

 

They just have to fix the Citadel. As it is the hub of the relay network. The Citadel makes all the relays work. Which, after Cronos Station, the Reapers take control of it, move it to Earth and shut down most of the relays, except for the one going to Earth, because that's where the majority of their forces are. If you bothered to look at your galaxy map before clicking the "order fleets to Earth", button, you'll see you can't access any other relay except for Earth.

 

If you had one relay operational, in addition to the Citadel, you would have a complete network.

 

A router is the hub of a computer network, and all the other computers and devices connect to it. Without the router, all the computers can't communicate with each other.

 

The Citadel is similar in function.

[themikefest]

All I wanted were the flashbacks fixed. The extended cut did that. That's the best thing I can say about it.

[correctamundo]

Ha, yeah he has a rather dry delivery most of the time. What was the "first point" on which he stumbled? The first point in the video I linked was on the Crucible and is correct.

 

The crucible is Hacketts project not Shepards. Sure Shepard may voice disagreement with building it, but Hackett is the one with four stripes so he's not taking orders from Shepard. In addition the quality or efficiency is dependant on Shepards actions. In a way that makes whether the crucible is finished or not in doubt. It is finished to the best of their knowledge though.

 

I like the mystery surrounding the crucible. It is a black box. In most cases irl even I would try to eliminate one but in a story like Shepards I'm very much ok with it. Besides I doubt that smudboys idea of building more ships instead is going to be enough. Somehow I get the feeling he wants a strategy game instead. Which is fine, strategy games are fun. Only Mass Effect is a cover shooter.

[Natureguy85]

The crucible is Hacketts project not Shepards. Sure Shepard may voice disagreement with building it, but Hackett is the one with four stripes so he's not taking orders from Shepard. In addition the quality or efficiency is dependant on Shepards actions. In a way that makes whether the crucible is finished or not in doubt. It is finished to the best of their knowledge though.

 

I like the mystery surrounding the crucible. It is a black box. In most cases irl even I would try to eliminate one but in a story like Shepards I'm very much ok with it. Besides I doubt that smudboys idea of building more ships instead is going to be enough. Somehow I get the feeling he wants a strategy game instead. Which is fine, strategy games are fun. Only Mass Effect is a cover shooter.

 

Shepard is the main character. See the "Shepard has no agency" section. The complaint isn't that Shepard isn't in charge, it's that the Crucible is finished once you get enough EMS no matter where that EMS is. There are no missions to get something specific the Crucible absolutely needs except for the Catalyst at the end. There are no missions to learn what this things does.

 

More ships would have worked if the writer wanted it to. They have the thanix cannon now and the species can actually unite rather than being split across the galaxy, as in previous cycles.

[Lightning-Lucan]

All I wanted were the flashbacks fixed. The extended cut did that. That's the best thing I can say about it.

I agree completely

 

 

Nice avatar by the way, is it Alix Wilton Regan ?

[correctamundo]

Shepard is the main character. See the "Shepard has no agency" section. The complaint isn't that Shepard isn't in charge, it's that the Crucible is finished once you get enough EMS no matter where that EMS is. There are no missions to get something specific the Crucible absolutely needs except for the Catalyst at the end.There are no missions to learn what this things does.
 
More ships would have worked if the writer wanted it too. They have the thanix cannon now and the species can actually unite rather than being split across the galaxy, as in previous cycles.

Well Shepard has agency. Not total, but who has that really?

And I doubt that it is all a question of whether the writer wants it or not. Making a game such as Mass Effect seems to be a fairly large collaborative effort.

[Natureguy85]

Well Shepard has agency. Not total, but who has that really?

And I doubt that it is all a question of whether the writer wants it or not. Making a game such as Mass Effect seems to be a fairly large collaborative effort.

 

Shepard ultimately has agency in terms of which missions you do later, but not in the Mars section. And in regards to what Smudboy is saying, You don't know the effects of getting more EMS than the minimum until later. It doesn't affect completion. And it doesn't matter where the EMS comes from. It doesn't have to be in Crucible research.

 

The second point is very true. Like Shamus, when I say writer, it refers to the team. That said, they may get some pressure from elsewhere but that is part of the problem then.

[themikefest]

Nice avatar by the way,

Thanks
 

is it Alix Wilton Regan ?

Yes. Looking forward to hearing her voice again in future Bioware games

[gothpunkboy89]

My exact example was someone who wanted to isolate their system. You wouldn't be stranding yourself on Pluto, you'd be stranding yourself inside the Sol system. Stop making analogies. You don't know how they work.  Those alternatives might be viable, and they might not be. It would depend on things like the technology difference and aggressiveness of the "locals" and whoever they are trying to isolate themselves from.

 

 

 

True, but we're talking about one of if not the most powerful emissions of energy in the universe.

 

 

 

 

I didn't make it clear enough that I was focusing on the impact because the asteroid hitting and smashing through a rigid object is not like bullets. As you pointed out above, the Relay is a relatively rigid object being smashed. Human tissue isn't like that. Vests not only take the kinetic energy, but they prevent penetration. Yes, bullets can expand or shatter in the body. Go look up what hollow point rounds are. This is to keep them from simply passing through. It's not the impact as much as that energy being dispersed into and damaging a wider area of tissues.

 

Plus, there's the pressure effects. Try shooting an empty milk jug and one filled with water and you'll see a big difference.

 

Now we're talking about standard bullets here. Most people killed by guns in the US are killed by handguns. There are different types of rounds that work differently.

 

 

 

 

 

That I or someone else came to a different conclusion than you isn't prima facie evidence of bias.  Having the video doesn't make him or me right; the content and the arguments within do. Surely, even you can grasp that concept. Your ridiculous question shows just how desperately you're scrambling to find any possible argument.against those of us who understand these things better than you do.

 

And what about the other things, particularly the analysis of the literature professor?

 

 

 

I didn't make it clear but I was referring to the Citadel beam, not the Crucible. That's an entire different issue. The galaxy was plenty unprepared and that had nothing to do with the Citadel beam. This technology had no military application, but is simply a transport for bodies.

I'm really tired of being told I missed something or didn't get it by people who can't explain what was supposedly so deep and thought provoking.  People wanted the Crucible to be a super weapon because the entire goal was to destroy the Reapers. I would be fine with it not being that but somehow it's just a giant battery that works with things already on the Citadel, including a tube that destroys them when shot and a mechanism to upload an organic mind for some reason. The Reapers have been telling us since ME2 that they were actually the good guys and then we get their stupid reason and can't reject it.

 

It is when examining original authorial intent. Pre-EC is what they really wanted to say and the EC was in response to fan outcry. Both can be looked at for different things.

 

Your mind goes to weird places. I think you need help.

 

Wow that Pluto example just went right over your head didn't it? I'm honestly not going to respond to this because you are clearly in not paying attention mode. So I'm not going to waste the effort to go into any sort of explanation. Just sufficient to say you are wrong and your statement makes no sense as you are clearly grasping for straws

 

And anyone who is even vaugly aware of what happens in the galaxy would plan for those events. Reapers I'm fairly confident in stating would be aware of those events and plan to create the Relays to survive those sort of problems. Squishy human bodies can survive tsunamis and avalanches as well as tornado and hurricanes. The biggest threat of those being the debris they can pick up. I've been out in a category 4 hurricane personally as long as you don't get hit with a chunk of fence post you are fairly ok.  Placed at the edge of the galaxy combined with the shielding and the fact they are not physically anchored in place only gravity held the survival of the Mu Relay isn't that much of a surprise.

 

Yep really in the not paying attention must be right and I must be wrong mode. There is a reason bullets penetrate our squishy skin mean while a BB gun or air soft gun doesn't. The kinetic energy of the bullet pierces our skin and any other body part save maybe bone depending on the kind of round. The kinetic energy of the bullet creates that pressure wave you mention. That momentum impacts the body the bullet penetrates flesh and bone and the pressure wave created by the high speed bullet is also transferred to the squishy human body.  Which again is just like what happened with Alpha Relay. The giant Relay sized asteroid was fired at high speed at the Relay. It impacted and the momentum of it overloaded the shielding and caused the energy containment to crack and release the energy in a massive explosion.

 

No the wording a choice of words rather show the bias. If you are talking politics to someone and the first words out of their mouth is "Well the liberal media always says X or Fox News says Y" it is fairly obvious of the bias of the speaker or the source material or both. Your videos you post are no different. They like you have already made up their mind on specific subjects thus completely closing their mind to any other set up.  Much like in another thread were you state:
 

 

R-r-r-r-r-r-r-retcon!  Like Leviathan, this was thrown in later to bolster the ending because they didn't put enough in the main story.

 

Which directly ignores 3 rather important points.

1st DLC is always thought of well in advance. So even if they don't start production on them till after the game ships it has already been planned out before the game is even finished.

 

2nd DLC is SUPPOSE TO add to the over all story. Maybe you are happy with paying $5.99 to unlock horse armor that only you can see online or $99.99 to unlock all MP related abilities on Assassin's Creed. Me I really don't like of DLC stuff I prefer the DLC that actually adds to the game. Which the DLC Bioware releases does just that in spades. 

 

3rd Games like this take all DLC into account to tell the whole story. Claiming Leviathan was pure retcon thrown in later to bolster their weak ending is idiotic and childish statement. Existing only because you have closed your mind to any other possibility besides Bioware are bumbling idiots who don't know what they are doing with this game.

 

Added to this specific topic of conversation you still ignore the the fact that people like you see only what they want to see. This is also true of the videos you post. It is how people can read Lord of the Rings and think it supports segregation or read Fahrenheit 451 a college student out right tell Bradbury the author of the book his statement of what the book is about is wrong.

 

You really just back up my statement with this line about pre EC was author's intent. How do you know that? Isn't EC simply expanding and providing a greater explanation of events that happened? Seems both were author's intent one was just explained better then the other. Please show your proof they intended it to be that way and only changed it because of fan out rage. Because 3 months after release makes it seem a lot less fan out rage and more they were rushed at the end to meet shipping date by EA. After it shipped it gave them a chance to actually expand the ending out to make it better explain things.

 

Yes I continually try to go to outrageous extremes to highlight the idiocy of the logic being used. EC exists and has existed longer then any other DLC in the game besides Ashes one. Trying to use pre EC in any argument is as stupid as trying to use the Ancient Greek explanation of wondering vagina to explain why women suffer cramps and bleed during their time of the month. When medical science has already explained exactly why they go though those issues.