Mass Effect Megathread - Ah, yes, titles. We have dismissed that claim - Games

[QUOTE=sltungle;30624694]Ah, right. I was working out when the first intelligent life COULD have evolved (not when the Reapers necessarily came about). I'm guessing the Reapers are a lot more recent than 7 GYA, though. Hell, they might 'only' be a billion years old or so. The Leviathan of Dis is about a billion years old and I'm certain it's gonna come back as a plot point in ME3 (like the Great Rift Valley Klendagon coming back from ME1 and being a plot point in ME2 (which I totally called!)[/QUOTE] Bioware gets a hard-on for being conservative and "hard sci-fi" in Mass Effect, so it wouldn't surprise me at all if the Reapers are around a billion years old.

[quote]Bioware gets a hard-on for being conservative and "hard sci-fi"[/quote] aha.. ahahahahaha um no. ME isn't even scifi, much less hard scifi. It's futuristic fantasy with scifi buzzwords thrown in. Go read you some books.

I always thought Sci-Fi meant fictional science.

Oh god, what happened here

[QUOTE=quinaking;30625065]I always thought Sci-Fi meant fictional science.[/QUOTE] Nope. Sci-Fi means fiction BASED on science. There about as much science in ME as there is in Lord of the Rings. "Mass Relays allow hyper ftl transit by reducing mass" So how exactly is it [I]reduced[/I] "Umm by a me field" Which reduces it HOW exactly? "umm by using a mass relay... and stuff" So how's this Genophage thing work? Snipping telomeres? RNA retranscription after unzipping the strand? "Umm see it phages the Genos and stuff" *wiggles hands* Yeah, science.

[QUOTE=SouthParkMGT;30625434]Oh god, what happened here[/QUOTE] Shit got sexy.

Compared to a lot of other Sci-fi it's not too realistic. Even the story isn't particularly good compared to other Sci-fis. Still, for a game and for a Space Opera, it's not bad.

[QUOTE=27X;30625641]Nope. Sci-Fi means fiction BASED on science. There about as much science in ME as there is in Lord of the Rings. "Mass Relays allow hyper ftl transit by reducing mass" So how exactly is it [I]reduced[/I] "Umm by a me field" Which reduces it HOW exactly? "umm by using a mass relay... and stuff" So how's this Genophage thing work? Snipping telomeres? RNA retranscription after unzipping the strand? "Umm see it phages the Genos and stuff" *wiggles hands* Yeah, science.[/QUOTE] What the hell are you on about? Mass Effect has PLENTY of science in it. Mass Effect technology is not [i]understood[/i] in the ME universe, that doesn't mean that it's definitely 100% impossible in all ways. Michael Faraday was busy explaining stuff like magnetism before we even knew god damn electrons existed. While, on the contrary, we have things like [b]mass[/b] which exist that everyone takes for granted: but nobody has a fucking clue how it works, or why it even exists in the first place. We can use it and manipulate it, we're [i]made[/i] out of it, but we don't even really understand it. Mordin partially explains the genophage in ME2 and explains how Krogan evolution was getting past it by attaching pieces of garbage DNA sequences that don't encode for genes onto the attack sites of the Krogan DNA where the genophage would otherwise have stuck itself. You could think of it almost like competitive inhibitors hogging up enzymes in a biological system. And then it has stuff in it that almost no sci-fi has but really should. Ships building up charges and needed to get rid of them. Travelling at fast speeds will redshift light behind you, and blueshift it in front of you. Projectiles in space won't just blow up on impact and instead will pierce ships and continue on out the back. Ceramic layers under a ship's surface can be used to counteract laser weaponry by ablating and acting as an opaque gas that scatters the light rendering the lasers harmless after the initial damage it done. There's an [i]exorbitant[/i] amount of science in Mass Effect: you couldn't be more wrong. You've just gotta look and listen for it. That's why you have the fucking 'investigate' options when you talk to people. [editline]22nd June 2011[/editline] Disclaimer: I'm not saying that FTL travel is feasible (theoretically there are ways to 'beat' the system and sort of exceed FTL (I'll go into it if you want me to, but otherwise I'm not gonna bother explaining it). However any sci-fi will have at least one fictional thing in it (hence the 'fi' or 'fiction' part) and FTL travel is almost universally the one thing that you just have to accept in that universe. That said the attempted explanations for how mass effect technology works in Mass Effect could make it possible due to the real life parallels it draws. Look up dark energy and the expansion of the universe and how it might effect the universes final state and you'll see what I mean.

I don't have to look up shit, I've read THOUSANDS of Sci Fi stories of varying degrees of theoretical probability from Lensman to Giants to The Mind Pool and back again. ME is about as science grounded as Star Wars, that is to say throwing a word around or contriving a microscopic plot point based on technical aspect does not make it [B]science[/B] fiction. It makes it fiction set in space.

I'm scared because there are a ton of questions that need answering in ME3 and I know they will all be resolved but I still feel scared about it. Like it's really bugging me, why do the civilizations have to evolve that way, and can only be harvested at that point?

[img]http://uppix.net/f/5/2/791fbd68c003fcc27104a2a799e0b.jpg[/img] Straight out off gmod screenshot section... Feel like creating Male-07 Shepard or this one.

that is awesome.

[QUOTE=sltungle;30625859]Blah blah blah[/QUOTE] It's not science fiction because while I guess it's not "100% impossible", if anything was, it would be purely coincidental and nothing in mass effect has any basis on real science. It is just space fantasy. They have in game science, but not any real world science. [editline]22nd June 2011[/editline] Also I know late but why can't Garrus use the scar healer it really pisses me off.

So would Star Wars not be considered Sci-Fi?

[QUOTE=quinaking;30626222]So would Star Wars not be considered Sci-Fi?[/QUOTE] Sci-fi is just a general term for futuristic settings, similar to how Fantasy settings can have a lot or very little magic and fantasy. Still good enough to be considered sci-fi even if it's not scientifically feasible, just less emphasis on the science and more on the fiction.

The closest thing that comes to mind when I think of that guy's definition of Sci-Fi is Doctor Who. It has it's own bullshit stuff that isn't invented but they do seem to rely on realistic science pretty often. Doctor Who certainly feels like Sci-Fi, but I'd say Mass Effect certainly fits that a lot more. Probably because of the whole consistent futuristic setting, where as The Doctor goes back to hang out with Charles Dickens and Shakespeare from time to time.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;30626289]Sci-fi is just a general term for futuristic settings, similar to how Fantasy settings can have a lot or very little magic and fantasy. Still good enough to be considered sci-fi even if it's not scientifically feasible, just less emphasis on the science and more on the fiction.[/QUOTE] And Mass Effect doesn't focus on the science? I gave some good examples about how Mass Effect contains a lot of science (electrical and heat build up, inertia actually exists, the effectiveness of laser weaponry and how to counter it, etc). If you're gonna say it doesn't contain any science then by all means offer examples (and don't mention FTL travel because, as I said, for a space opera you basically have to accept that FTL travel exists). Or are we basically going to argue the point that while the in game universe may have a lot of science behind it, the plot itself isn't driven by science (which doesn't make it unscientific in any way I'd point out)?

[QUOTE=quinaking;30626341]The closest thing that comes to mind when I think of that guy's definition of Sci-Fi is Doctor Who. It has it's own bullshit stuff that isn't invented but they do seem to rely on realistic science pretty often. Doctor Who certainly feels like Sci-Fi, but I'd say Mass Effect certainly fits that a lot more. Probably because of the whole consistent futuristic setting, where as The Doctor goes back to hang out with Charles Dickens and Shakespeare from time to time.[/QUOTE] That's probably because technically realistic things aren't very interesting and people prefer something comparable to things they know than have a theoretical physics lesson just to find out how the ship works. They sacrifice a lot of things like that to make it a more appealing story. Look at Starship Troopers military wise, the book was great but the movie almost gave me an aneurysm. [QUOTE=sltungle;30626368]And Mass Effect doesn't focus on the science? I gave some good examples about how Mass Effect contains a lot of science (electrical and heat build up, inertia actually exists, the effectiveness of laser weaponry and how to counter it, etc). If you're gonna say it doesn't contain any science then by all means offer examples (and don't mention FTL travel because, as I said, for a space opera you basically have to accept that FTL travel exists). Or are we basically going to argue the point that while the in game universe may have a lot of science behind it, the plot itself isn't driven by science (which doesn't make it unscientific in any way I'd point out)?[/QUOTE] Adding in a few restrictions on the technology does not make it any more scientific. Why does it matter anyway if the science is good or not, the story and everything else isn't too bad.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;30626446]Adding in a few restrictions on the technology does not make it any more scientific. Why does it matter anyway if the science is good or not, the story and everything else isn't too bad.[/QUOTE] Because as far as I can see it is scientific, and generally the idea is for people to back claims up that they've made. I've backed mine up, now people arguing on the other side can back theirs up. It doesn't matter if it's scientific or not, I mean the Star Wars movies were great and, like it's been said, THEY were unscientific. What bugs me when people make a claim and don't even attempt to justify it.

[quote]for a space opera you basically have to accept that FTL travel exists[/quote]uhh no. You don't, actually. Like I said, read some books, expand your horizons. Protip: Opinions don't need justification, and I'm not bothering to try to change yours. Something you and Phaedon especially have a shit ton of trouble attempting to decipher. Claim? roflmao... every race in ME is based on human geometry is completely compatible with a human-centric biosphere, and even has the same type of generalized cultural transactions that don't even require the remotest social translation to recognize. WarHammer 40K is made for ten year old boys and doesn't have that. You're leaning at windmills.

Even Avatar doesn't have FTL, it just makes a different scenario without it. More 17th century Colonialism than modern Globalism.

[QUOTE=27X;30626481]uhh no. You don't, actually. Like I said, read some books, expand your horizons.[/QUOTE] I've read plenty of science fiction books. Hundreds at the least, possibly thousands. I have several gigabytes of sci-fi eBooks on my computer and the majority of my bookshelf is populated by sci-fi books. I've watched plenty of sci-fi movies too, and played plenty of sci-fi games. As far as the 'science content' goes for most pieces of media that fit into the science fiction genre, I'd say Mass Effect is pretty high up there. [editline]22nd June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Devodiere;30626513]Even Avatar doesn't have FTL, it just makes a different scenario without it. More 17th century Colonialism than modern Globalism.[/QUOTE] Even if you want to use FTL as a justification of something being unscientific then, again, I'd point out FTL travel is sort of possible. For example, wormholes are theoretically possible and they allow you to go from point A to point B faster than light could without you actually violating any physical laws. Space itself can also expand faster than light, so if you could sit yourself on a 'ripple' of space you could conceivably get somewhere faster than light otherwise could. And on the note of space itself moving faster than light: dark energy is the force that physicists currently accept as being responsible for the accelerating expansion of the universe and in the Mass Effect universe element zero is supposed to generate fields of dark energy. While element zero itself isn't entirely scientific the mechanism and forces through which FTL travel is achieved in Mass Effect would fit with modern day accepted theories.

[QUOTE=27X;30626481]roflmao... every race in ME is based on human geometry is completely compatible with a human-centric biosphere, and even has the same type of generalized cultural transactions that don't even require the remotest social translation to recognize. WarHammer 40K is made for ten year old boys and doesn't have that. You're leaning at windmills.[/QUOTE] There's more to a sci-fi than a scientific prediction, it still has to be a piece of literature. Different aliens might be more realistic and give a foreign aspect to the story but familiar aliens are more telling a modern day story in space, give it some disconnection from the current day but still be a similar issue. Different intentions as a story element. Scientific realism is just one aspect and doesn't decide a superior.

[sp]Cheating on your ME1 love interest in ME2 will have "consequences" in ME3.[/sp] Not sure information about cheating on your ME1 was correct, as it seems to be this. lol, Shepard you dog, stop sleeping around. [url]http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3403293[/url] SA has lot of info.

I want to see a star exploding kill a reaper in ME3.

That would be awesome!

Given how dark energy is apparently killing Dholen (Haestrom's star) in ME2 I wouldn't rule using the star (or others) as a weapon in ME3. Unless the Reapers are destabilising the star themselves.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;30626640]There's more to a sci-fi than a scientific prediction, it still has to be a piece of literature. Different aliens might be more realistic and give a foreign aspect to the story but familiar aliens are more telling a modern day story in space, give it some disconnection from the current day but still be a similar issue. Different intentions as a story element. Scientific realism is just one aspect and doesn't decide a superior.[/QUOTE] Which has jack to do with topic at hand, as things like haptic interfaces and medigel analogues are becoming more feasible in practical approach. As I've already stated, a point for game play convenience does not a defining demarcation make, and neither does anthropomorphization for consumer relatability's sake.

[QUOTE=meatballfish;30626845]I want to see a star exploding kill a reaper in ME3.[/QUOTE] Shepard's heroic sacrifice? Causing a star to implode and destroy the Reaper fleet.

[QUOTE=27X;30625035]aha.. ahahahahaha um no. [B]ME isn't even scifi[/B], much less hard scifi. It's futuristic fantasy with scifi buzzwords thrown in. Go read you some books.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=27X;30625641]Nope. Sci-Fi means fiction BASED on science. There about as much science in ME as there is in Lord of the Rings. "Mass Relays allow hyper ftl transit by reducing mass" So how exactly is it [I]reduced[/I] "Umm by a me field" Which reduces it HOW exactly? "umm by using a mass relay... and stuff" So how's this Genophage thing work? Snipping telomeres? RNA retranscription after unzipping the strand? "Umm see it phages the Genos and stuff" *wiggles hands* Yeah, science.[/QUOTE] Your logic is massively flawed. Just because Mass Effect does not explicitly explain in depth its science concepts like mass relays and the genophage, that does not mean that they are not fictional science. If they aren't examples of fictional science, then what are they examples of? Let's look at the wikipedia page on Science Fiction. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction[/url] [quote]Science fiction is a genre of fiction dealing with the impact of imagined innovations in science or technology[/quote] Well, the mass relays, synthetic life forms, advanced weaponry and genetic modification all fit that description. [quote]Exploring the consequences of such innovations is the traditional purpose of science fiction[/quote] This is pretty much the storyline of Mass Effect - the consequences of synthetic lifeforms such as the reapers and the geth, the consequences of being able to travel the galaxy with mass relays, the consequences of genetic modification such as the genophage. [quote]It is similar to, but differs from fantasy in that, within the context of the story, its imaginary elements are largely possible within scientifically established or scientifically postulated laws of nature (though some elements in a story might still be pure imaginative speculation)[/quote] Well things like the Mass Relays are obviously based on the laws of nature, a Mass Effect field does what it says, if creates a field which effects the mass in some way - how it does this is irrelevant, and an indepth explanation is not a requirement of sci-fi. We know faster than light travel is currently impossible because you require infinite energy for any non-zero mass, therefore the concept of mass relays creating a mass free coridoor makes sense based on what we know about light speed travel already. It doesn't have to be possible. Things like biotics probably fit into the "pure imaginative speculation" part of that description. I'm fairly sure 99% of people would disagree with you, and agree with me that Mass Effect is science fiction.