inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 16, 2017 22:30:18 GMT
doubtful...tho I like the idea of heavy weapons Doubtful? We had heavy weapons in ME2 and ME3. but their usage and importance decreased in ME3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2543
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
Deleted
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 22:33:03 GMT
So, you're here just to ridicule people who aren't quite so pessimistic as you are. a pessimist is what an optimists calls a realist. The decision of a weaponless nomad is moronic, but you are free to try and find a logical reason why it could make sense I have absolutely no objection to you being a pessimist or suspicious or anything else. I am having difficulty accepting terms like "moronic" being flung about in relation to people are are "just not as pessimistic as you are." I've never said it's illogical to be suspicious or anything else of the sort; yet, I've had several people imply that we're being "moronic" and assorted other terms for giving Bioware writers even half a chance to tell their story before passing judgment on it. In addition, I am not necessarily trying to find "a logical reason why it could make sense." In the context of telling a story, I'm saying that sometimes authors do choose to include illogical elements to set up specific situations. Since we don't yet know the plot, we can't yet tell whether or not this is possibly some sort of plot device... let alone judge whether it is a good plot device or a bad one. We can speculate... which is what everyone here is actually doing... but it's all still speculation.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Nov 27, 2024 23:26:53 GMT
36,961
colfoley
19,150
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jan 16, 2017 22:33:53 GMT
its not that hard to justify given that i came up with a perfectly logical explanation for the lack of ship weapons, but not ground based small arms, and i only have a passing familiarity with the lore. And mine hasn't been the only one. Granted the nomad is a bit harder, but come on, its not that big of a stretch. Certainly not to be met with such hand wavey arrogance. While I agree possibly with the Tempest (but it requires a use of the ship and coordination with the rest of the Apex forces that borders on precog abilities and need a quantic communicator, something that afawk is Milky way tech only), a weapon less Nomad can’t just be explained. It’s a lazy game choice at best, and a dumb mistake at most. Now the question becomes, can each and every one of us accept it? The answer, I'm afraid, it's no. On a personal note, I could excuse something like this if the rest of ME:A is a jewel, not necessarily flawless, but mistake made with good intentions and limited to little things, story wise. A story with plot holes would convince me to renounce to bioware forever, I'm afraid. every story ever told has plot holes. its not that hard to justify given that i came up with a perfectly logical explanation for the lack of ship weapons, but not ground based small arms, and i only have a passing familiarity with the lore. And mine hasn't been the only one. Granted the nomad is a bit harder, but come on, its not that big of a stretch. Certainly not to be met with such hand wavey arrogance. All due respect, but no, you did not. "Legal reasons" is not a logical explanation. I know of no law, ever, that prevented reasonable defensive measures for an expedition into unknown territory, or indeed explorers/pioneers dumb enough to go along with such a law. And note, "running away/FTL" is not the extent of reasonable defensive measures. since we're talking about real life here i did a little checking. Neither the initial expeditions of Christopher Columbus or Ferdinand Magellan were armed. So apparently as far as it is concerned the AI has real world precedent for not being armed. As far as the legal argument A. The Ai can defend itself. B. We have seen armed warships either in the hands of governments or illegal pirate/ terrorist groups. C. The council has a history of psssing and enforcing with extreme sanction ridiculous law after ridiculous law. The treaty of Farixen, the ban on new exploration of the relay network, the ban on Ai research. Etc. Etc. Etc.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Jan 16, 2017 22:36:48 GMT
So, you're here just to join in the gang ridiculing people who aren't quite so pessimistic as you are? Perhaps you can point out where I ridicule the less pessimistic (and I assume you mean other users in this context)? On second thought, maybe don't, because my motivations aren't the topic here. I've said this to you before and and I'll kindly ask you again to take it to heart: people who disagree with you on here are not "ganging up on you". They have opinions, criticisms and arguments and they will express them as they see fit, so long as they do not break the rules. This includes criticism of BioWare and their games. You are free to engage or disengage as you see fit but please don't play the victim card in an attempt to get others to back down.
|
|
spacebeetle
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
Posts: 462 Likes: 711
inherit
2525
0
Apr 26, 2017 15:38:15 GMT
711
spacebeetle
462
January 2017
spacebeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by spacebeetle on Jan 16, 2017 22:36:59 GMT
While I agree possibly with the Tempest (but it requires a use of the ship and coordination with the rest of the Apex forces that borders on precog abilities and need a quantic communicator, something that afawk is Milky way tech only), a weapon less Nomad can’t just be explained. It’s a lazy game choice at best, and a dumb mistake at most. Now the question becomes, can each and every one of us accept it? The answer, I'm afraid, it's no. On a personal note, I could excuse something like this if the rest of ME:A is a jewel, not necessarily flawless, but mistake made with good intentions and limited to little things, story wise. A story with plot holes would convince me to renounce to bioware forever, I'm afraid. every story ever told has plot holes. All due respect, but no, you did not. "Legal reasons" is not a logical explanation. I know of no law, ever, that prevented reasonable defensive measures for an expedition into unknown territory, or indeed explorers/pioneers dumb enough to go along with such a law. And note, "running away/FTL" is not the extent of reasonable defensive measures. since we're talking about real life here i did a little checking. Neither the initial expeditions of Christopher Columbus or Ferdinand Magellan were armed. So apparently as far as it is concerned the AI has real world precedent for not being armed. As far as the legal argument A. The Ai can defend itself. B. We have seen armed warships either in the hands of governments or illegal pirate/ terrorist groups. C. The council has a history of psssing and enforcing with extreme sanction ridiculous law after ridiculous law. The treaty of Farixen, the ban on new exploration of the relay network, the ban on Ai research. Etc. Etc. Etc. Not really: that's a pessimistic assumption, based on a very small sample, if any. The size of the plot holes mainly defines when they are acceptable and when they are not. Considering the Tempest and the Nomad will accompany us for the whole adventure I say this is a pretty big hole.
|
|
sjsharp2010
N7
Go Team!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
Posts: 12,986 Likes: 21,018
inherit
2309
0
Nov 27, 2024 19:03:17 GMT
21,018
sjsharp2010
Go Team!
12,986
December 2016
sjsharp2010
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
|
Post by sjsharp2010 on Jan 16, 2017 22:38:29 GMT
Hmmph. Kids these days have no appreciation for a well-calibrated pair of Thanix cannons. And now I simply must know how Vetra will pass time aboard the Tempest without calibration. Sensors might still need some callibration though otherwise we'd never find any planets to land on we'd be flying blind so she should still be good for that.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Nov 17, 2024 22:23:52 GMT
31,578
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 16, 2017 22:40:18 GMT
All due respect, but no, you did not. "Legal reasons" is not a logical explanation. I know of no law, ever, that prevented reasonable defensive measures for an expedition into unknown territory, or indeed explorers/pioneers dumb enough to go along with such a law. And note, "running away/FTL" is not the extent of reasonable defensive measures. Another BTW question: do you know of any expedition (without the goal of conquer/war) that went into an exploration mission with armatures at the spearhead? The Perry Expedition.
|
|
spacebeetle
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
Posts: 462 Likes: 711
inherit
2525
0
Apr 26, 2017 15:38:15 GMT
711
spacebeetle
462
January 2017
spacebeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by spacebeetle on Jan 16, 2017 22:41:39 GMT
And now I simply must know how Vetra will pass time aboard the Tempest without calibration. Sensors might still need some callibration though otherwise we'd never find any planets to land on we'd be flying blind so she should still be good for that. Sensors are integrated in the Tempest, so I wager they should require less work to be kept up to speed. Surely less than the cannon made with foreign Turian tech derived from the Reapers and forcibly integrated in a human ship. I'm up to fill her nails, do some sparring and help her destress, if needed.
|
|
inherit
2137
0
Dec 18, 2021 22:02:27 GMT
1,222
dropzofcrimzon
1,391
November 2016
dropzofcrimzon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda
DropzOfCrimzon
|
Post by dropzofcrimzon on Jan 16, 2017 22:42:05 GMT
a pessimist is what an optimists calls a realist. The decision of a weaponless nomad is moronic, but you are free to try and find a logical reason why it could make sense I have absolutely no objection to you being a pessimist or suspicious or anything else. I am having difficulty accepting terms like "moronic" being flung about in relation to people are are "just not as pessimistic as you are." I've never said it's illogical to be suspicious or anything else of the sort; yet, I've had several people imply that we're being "moronic" and assorted other terms for giving Bioware writers even half a chance to tell their story before passing judgment on it. In addition, I am not necessarily trying to find "a logical reason why it could make sense." In the context of telling a story, I'm saying that sometimes authors do choose to include illogical elements to set up specific situations. Since we don't yet know the plot, we can't yet tell whether or not this is possibly some sort of plot device... let alone judge whether it is a good plot device or a bad one. We can speculate... which is what everyone here is actually doing... but it's all still speculation. and an author making that call needs NOT to be given a pass but to be called on something that stupid which is what people are doing here and back then when the god awful idea of thermal clips came about.
|
|
sjsharp2010
N7
Go Team!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
Posts: 12,986 Likes: 21,018
inherit
2309
0
Nov 27, 2024 19:03:17 GMT
21,018
sjsharp2010
Go Team!
12,986
December 2016
sjsharp2010
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
|
Post by sjsharp2010 on Jan 16, 2017 22:44:09 GMT
Sensors might still need some callibration though otherwise we'd never find any planets to land on we'd be flying blind so she should still be good for that. Sensors are integrated in the Tempest, so I wager they should require less work to be kept up to speed. Surely less than the cannon made with foreign Turian tech derived from the Reapers and forcibly integrated in a human ship. I'm up to fill her nails, do some sparring and help her destress, if needed. I suspect one of my male Ryder's will as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2830
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
Deleted
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 22:44:09 GMT
Not really: that's a pessimistic assumption, based on a very small sample, if any. The size of the plot holes mainly defines when they are acceptable and when they are not. Considering the Tempest and the Nomad will accompany us for the whole adventure I say this is a pretty big hole. [/quote] I just wanted to interject here and remind you that the Tempest and Nomad being unarmed are not plot holes. You especially can'5 call them such since we don't know the plot of the story. Calling them plot holes is simply wrong both in terminology and in sporit.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
Member is Online
Nov 27, 2024 23:26:53 GMT
36,961
colfoley
19,150
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Jan 16, 2017 22:45:00 GMT
Though from a game design standpoint i am thrilled the nomad isn't armed. That means we won't be dragging it along our backs like a five ton anvil if it ends up sucking. And then Bw is oh for three on this sort of thing...I'm glad it's not an integral part of the games design philosophy.
|
|
inherit
1129
0
Nov 27, 2024 14:46:42 GMT
2,052
traks
1,012
Aug 22, 2016 11:07:02 GMT
August 2016
traks
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
t_raks_99
|
Post by traks on Jan 16, 2017 22:45:11 GMT
Another BTW question: do you know of any expedition (without the goal of conquer/war) that went into an exploration mission with armatures at the spearhead? The Perry Expedition. Not a good example, because that expedition didn't went into the unknown and had a pretty clear goal in mind. But, maybe I shouldn't have used conquer/war as the only goals named in my post.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
Nov 27, 2024 23:38:32 GMT
26,313
themikefest
15,639
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Jan 16, 2017 22:45:54 GMT
...and there is no time to explain You forgot the first part. You don't need to know......
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Nov 17, 2024 22:23:52 GMT
31,578
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 16, 2017 22:48:10 GMT
Not a good example, because that expedition didn't went into the unknown and had a pretty clear goal in mind. No, it's a perfect example. The goal of that expedition was to explore and survey the area and form diplomatic relations with the nations in the region, the exact same goals the Andromeda Initiative has. And the Helios Cluster wasn't an unknown, it was looked over from here in the Milky Way and chosen because it was seen as a place with lots of resources.
|
|
sjsharp2010
N7
Go Team!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
Posts: 12,986 Likes: 21,018
inherit
2309
0
Nov 27, 2024 19:03:17 GMT
21,018
sjsharp2010
Go Team!
12,986
December 2016
sjsharp2010
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition, Dragon Age The Veilguard
|
Post by sjsharp2010 on Jan 16, 2017 22:48:26 GMT
Not really: that's a pessimistic assumption, based on a very small sample, if any. The size of the plot holes mainly defines when they are acceptable and when they are not. Considering the Tempest and the Nomad will accompany us for the whole adventure I say this is a pretty big hole. I just wanted to interject here and remind you that the Tempest and Nomad being unarmed are not plot holes. You especially can'5 call them such since we don't know the plot of the story. Calling them plot holes is simply wronAgg both in terminology and in sporit. [/quote] Agreed we don't know the story yet so we can't really call it a plot hole
|
|
spacebeetle
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
Posts: 462 Likes: 711
inherit
2525
0
Apr 26, 2017 15:38:15 GMT
711
spacebeetle
462
January 2017
spacebeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by spacebeetle on Jan 16, 2017 22:49:18 GMT
The size of the plot holes mainly defines when they are acceptable and when they are not.Considering the Tempest and the Nomad will accompany us for the whole adventure I say this is a pretty big hole. I just wanted to interject here and remind you that the Tempest and Nomad being unarmed are not plot holes. You especially can'5 call them such since we don't know the plot of the story. Calling them plot holes is simply wrong both in terminology and in sporit. [/span] [/quote] And that's why, if you read again the post, I stressed the "I SAY": personal interpretation of the data at hand, organized in a coherent pattern. I would be pleasantly surprised if we’ll be delivered with a logic and coherent justification: at the moment though, the elements that we have point me in a direction where there isn’t any.
|
|
inherit
1129
0
Nov 27, 2024 14:46:42 GMT
2,052
traks
1,012
Aug 22, 2016 11:07:02 GMT
August 2016
traks
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
t_raks_99
|
Post by traks on Jan 16, 2017 22:54:47 GMT
Not a good example, because that expedition didn't went into the unknown and had a pretty clear goal in mind. No, it's a perfect example. The goal of that expedition was to explore and survey the area and form diplomatic relations with the nations in the region, the exact same goals the Andromeda Initiative has. And the Helios Cluster wasn't an unknown, it was looked over from here in the Milky Way and chosen because it was seen as a place with lots of resources. C'mon now! We don't know yet whether we will meet any intelligent races in Andromeda, while the Perry expedition went to Japan to force them to open trade routes - with the use of gunboats if necessary. So a diplomatic conflict, with a known other side, which was to be solved with military options if needed. Not comparable at all. Edit: BTW, that gunboat strategy was usually used by the dominant force in a conflict as a threat (and obviously were military/government missions). Still a good answer.
|
|
inherit
Scribbles
185
0
Nov 17, 2024 22:23:52 GMT
31,578
Hanako Ikezawa
22,991
August 2016
hanakoikezawa
|
Post by Hanako Ikezawa on Jan 16, 2017 22:58:49 GMT
No, it's a perfect example. The goal of that expedition was to explore and survey the area and form diplomatic relations with the nations in the region, the exact same goals the Andromeda Initiative has. And the Helios Cluster wasn't an unknown, it was looked over from here in the Milky Way and chosen because it was seen as a place with lots of resources. C'mon now! We don't know yet whether we will meet any intelligent races in Andromeda, while the Perry expedition went to Japan to force them to open trade routes - with the use of gunboats if necessary. So a diplomatic conflict, with a known other side, which was to be solved with military options if needed. Not comparable at all. Still a good answer. We expect it though. After all the Pathfinders are part diplomat and one of the briefings we'll eventually see is all about First Contact Protocols. Why do that if we don't expect to run into aliens at some point? Glad you liked the answer though. Answered you perfectly before you added all these other criteria.
|
|
GannayevOfDreams
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Neverwinter Nights
Posts: 578 Likes: 1,090
inherit
1509
0
1,090
GannayevOfDreams
578
September 2016
gannayevofdreams
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by GannayevOfDreams on Jan 16, 2017 23:04:23 GMT
Whether you think building the Tempest without weapons was smart or not there was undoubtedly a reason for it. The dangers of unknown space are obvious to anyone, most of all people who's job it is to think of things like it. I have to imagine it was a calculated risk taken by the project designers. They must have figured that arming every ship, especially scout ships, would more than likely be seen as an aggressive action. We'd be seen as an invading army. Conquerors.
I highly doubt we're bringing a huge standing military force. The bulk of the Andromeda Initiative is probably scientists and civilians, with a minimum to moderate military force only as a protective measure. We're not outfitting to fight a war in Andromeda, no way we'd have the resources for that. Since we're flying into the unknown who knows how long it would take for us to get those resources.
That leaves us with two realistic options for survival should we run into a hostile alien force. Running away, or diplomacy. Both of which the Tempest is perfectly designed to do. No weapons means less mass and a more agile ship for running away. No weapons also means we appear non-threatening enough to make diplomacy much easier.
At the end of the day maybe it is a stupid design decision. Maybe it will bite us in the ass. Regardless, it was a decision that was made by the people who put AI together. No one is forced into the Andromeda Initiative, if you choose to join, if you choose to abide by the parameters of the mission, then you choose to assume the risks. It's not going to change at this point.
|
|
inherit
Psi-Cop
38
0
Feb 21, 2019 15:55:45 GMT
10,231
CrutchCricket
The Emperor Daft Serious
4,577
August 2016
crutchcricket
CrutchCricket
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by CrutchCricket on Jan 16, 2017 23:11:02 GMT
every story ever told has plot holes. since we're talking about real life here i did a little checking. Neither the initial expeditions of Christopher Columbus or Ferdinand Magellan were armed. So apparently as far as it is concerned the AI has real world precedent for not being armed. As far as the legal argument A. The Ai can defend itself. B. We have seen armed warships either in the hands of governments or illegal pirate/ terrorist groups. C. The council has a history of psssing and enforcing with extreme sanction ridiculous law after ridiculous law. The treaty of Farixen, the ban on new exploration of the relay network, the ban on Ai research. Etc. Etc. Etc. That's probably false, but more to the point, do you believe that justifies any level or any amount of nonsense to be written in? Should we demand no consistency, or basic common sense? As to historical examples: You can take this one with a grain of salt, but still: Source: www.npr.org/2013/04/06/176132730/the-first-gun-in-americaBecause there is little mention of weapons in the earliest chronicles, most naval historians have concluded that the ships were not well armed. The work of Donald Keith, Director of Ships of Discovery, and other nautical archaeologists, has challenged that view. Dr. Keith reports that the earliest Caribbean shipwrecks have well-formed batteries of armament. For example, the Molasses Reef wreck, a late 15th to early 16th century Spanish wreck in the Turks and Caicos Islands, carried "ship-killing" wrought-iron cannons called bombardetas and a cerbatana; three types of versos, swivel guns mounted on the "gunwale" (hence the name) which were useful for raking the decks of enemy ships or keeping unfriendly canoe-borne Indians at bay; smaller swivel guns called harquebuts which could be mounted on the ship's boats during amphibious assaults; and a variety of portable arms including rifles (arquebuces), crossbows, lances, swords, and even hand grenades. These weapons show a sophisticated appreciation of guns and range of shot. Even though we cannot specify their effects, they were a key element in the conquest of the Americas.
These were not, however, warships. The warships of the day were galleys, long, sleek vessels driven to sea by an oversize lateen sail and then propelled into battle by scores of oarsmen. Their bows were constructed as battlefields with a battering ram leading the way below an artillery platform, from which large caliber cannons fired scrap metal, and a boarding platform from which archers, musketeers, and swivel gunners attacked the enemy from close range.
The ships of exploration were general-purpose cargo vessels (investors were reluctant to risk first class ships). They were uncomfortable and were not made for the business of discovery, yet their maneuverability, their flexibility of rigging, their ability to travel more than 100 miles per day under favorable conditions, and to sail in shallow water gave them a major role in voyages of exploration. In the words of Dr. Roger Smith, underwater archaeologist for the State of Florida, caravels were the "Mercury spacecraft of a long line of transoceanic vessels."
It was only after the major discoveries of the sixteenth century had been completed that a new vessel was created for the purposes of transoceanic commerce. This new ship was the famed "galleon." Designed in response to the need for speed and security, galleons combined the cargo capacity of the nao, the sleek water lines of the galley, and the sail patterns and rigging of the caravel. Source: www.flmnh.ufl.edu/caribarch/columbus.htmWhat to take away: guns weren't mentioned in the writings of Columbus on his first voyage and people assume they weren't there. But some historians (rightly) think that's batshit and have supporting evidence of other ships with similar purpose that had plenty of weapons despite not being warships. I also included the last paragraph to highlight the part that doesn't fit if we're comparing historical exploration like Columbus' with the AI. Exploration back then was seen as very risky in the economic sense. Meaning any expedition that set out underprepared did so because no one (or not enough people) were crazy enough to sink money into it for fear of literally sinking their money. Not because of laws and certainly not because "lol who needs guns?" I should think it would be obvious that this doesn't apply to the AI which as I've argued in the past necessarily cost someone back home in the Milky Way some serious money and resources. The trip to Andromeda wasn't made in beater ships so they damn well better have been designed for any encounter they could possibly think of. And to claim they didn't think of a case where pew-pews were needed is to insult the intelligence of, well everybody with a brain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2830
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
Deleted
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 23:11:20 GMT
And that's why, if you read again the post, I stressed the "I SAY": personal interpretation of the data at hand, organized in a coherent pattern. I would be pleasantly surprised if we’ll be delivered with a logic and coherent justification: at the moment though, the elements that we have point me in a direction where there isn’t any. [/quote] The fact that you say it''s your personal interpretation does not change the fact that it is not a plot hole. It does not fit the definition. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you again with this post.
|
|
Sondergaard
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR
Posts: 572 Likes: 975
inherit
1505
0
Sept 27, 2024 16:57:55 GMT
975
Sondergaard
572
Sept 8, 2016 21:17:59 GMT
September 2016
sondergaard
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR
|
Post by Sondergaard on Jan 16, 2017 23:13:08 GMT
Nope. Meta-gaming away a nonsensical decision breaks immersion, pure and simple. It makes no sense for the Tempest to be unarmed in-game. The fact we'll never need them is irrelevant. Also, the fact that such a decision was made in the first place does not bode well for the story, my main reason for wanting this game. And being concerned that not having pretend weapons on my pretend space-magic powered ship does not mean I have deep seated psychological problems relating to my vulnerabilities. It means I expect rational, in-game reasons for the choices made by the AI. I have yet to see anything explaining the lack of weapons or the pathfinder's shag palace. us Then, fine, expect it and simply don't buy the game. The issue I wonder about is why there is this deep seated need here to convince myself and others that we're being irrational simply because not having weapons we won't be required to use in a game doesn't bother us or to convince us to not buy the game from people who state that they still plan to buy the game regardless or to convince us that there just can't possibly be any in story reason for Bioware to want to have a few illogical choices made by an pretend initiative in their story and to say it's irrational to even give Bioware any chance at all to tell us their story (to even keep an open mind that they might actually be attempting to tell us one) before making a final judgment on it. All I've ever really said is that I intend to take a "wait and see" approach. My advice - Don't buy any game until you yourself are confident that it at least interests you... and don't care so much whether or not I'm at home meta-gaming away nonsensical decisions while enjoying the games I do eventually buy and play. If you're buying it just to prove to people that it's as bad as you expected... probably not the best way to spend your money... not that I'll care even if you do. Nothing I've said about this prevents or discourages you from not buying this game. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to do anything. I'm simply pointing out an inconsistency as I see it. Last time I checked this wasn't the BioWare fanboi forum and differing views were accepted for discussion. Trust me, I want there to be a valid reason for this as I want my Mass Effect fix. I just don't see how it can be justified in game. Thanks for chiming in with a well reasoned argument though.
|
|
spacebeetle
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
Posts: 462 Likes: 711
inherit
2525
0
Apr 26, 2017 15:38:15 GMT
711
spacebeetle
462
January 2017
spacebeetle
Mass Effect Trilogy
|
Post by spacebeetle on Jan 16, 2017 23:24:33 GMT
Well it does in reality, at least for me: because up until launch we will not have all the pertinent data, what we are crushing together in this thread are opinions based on personal interpretations (convincing or not, but that’s beside the point). So, it’s not facts VS opinions here, it’s interpretations VS interpretations. Personal interpretations of the data at hand to be precise: just as I can’t demonstrate as a fact, that weapons less Nomad and Tempest are silly (but I’m positive about it), at the same time you can’t demonstrate this isn’t a plot hole (even if you’re utterly convinced). This, simply because we lack the facts that will be at our disposal only after the launch of ME:A… Leaks not considered. Hope it's clear enough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2543
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
Deleted
0
Nov 27, 2024 23:40:28 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2017 23:32:25 GMT
Then, fine, expect it and simply don't buy the game. The issue I wonder about is why there is this deep seated need here to convince myself and others that we're being irrational simply because not having weapons we won't be required to use in a game doesn't bother us or to convince us to not buy the game from people who state that they still plan to buy the game regardless or to convince us that there just can't possibly be any in story reason for Bioware to want to have a few illogical choices made by an pretend initiative in their story and to say it's irrational to even give Bioware any chance at all to tell us their story (to even keep an open mind that they might actually be attempting to tell us one) before making a final judgment on it. All I've ever really said is that I intend to take a "wait and see" approach. My advice - Don't buy any game until you yourself are confident that it at least interests you... and don't care so much whether or not I'm at home meta-gaming away nonsensical decisions while enjoying the games I do eventually buy and play. If you're buying it just to prove to people that it's as bad as you expected... probably not the best way to spend your money... not that I'll care even if you do. Nothing I've said about this prevents or discourages you from not buying this game. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to do anything. I'm simply pointing out an inconsistency as I see it. Last time I checked this wasn't the BioWare fanboi forum and differing views were accepted for discussion. Trust me, I want there to be a valid reason for this as I want my Mass Effect fix. I just don't see how it can be justified in game. Thanks for chiming in with a well reasoned argument though. The act of "meta-gaming away nonsensical data" is something a player would do... not the developer. The developer would be, in that scenario, the one creating the "nonsensical data." So, you criticism was directed at other players (namely me, since you were directly responding to my post)... not Bioware... and you clearly stated that practice was what was illogical... so, I stand by my statement, that you're still trying to convince me that I'm being illogical. I still feel I'm being completely logical. I am somewhat more optimistic than many... but I think I have as much right to be an optimist and anyone else here has to be a pessimist. Regardless, though, doing anything but waiting to see what Bioware actually does with this in there story is all anyone here can logically do. Surely, realistically, they are not going to suddenly break with whatever story plan they've already drawn up months ago to add in weapons that they have not written in any need to use in the game. People can wait with either optimism or pessimism. So, please state your opinion, but what's really the point for suggesting I'm so illogical for stating mine?... and why is it acceptable that this thread overwhelmingly ridicules only the optimists in this crowd?
|
|