2247 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerevar-as]

Sylvianus wrote...

Seriously, I don't know how people have to think she was racist. I'm black, I've never thought of. What she told  to me always seemed to be of realism and pragmatism. And her way of thinking in a difficult geopolitical context is entirely consistent with mine.

2157: First War Contact

2170: Mindoir destroyed

2176 Batarian Blitz on elysium

2178 Torfan

2183: Eden Prime attacked by Geth and Saren.

How can we not be cautious for Humanity in this context ?

The Alliance was on the offensive there. Payback for Elysium. After doing I Remember Me I found it was worth it.

The problem many seem to miss is that aliens are also aliens to themselves. So it´s not humanity vs everyone else. If Asari, Turians and Salarians can manage to live with each other more or less well, no reason why humanity shouldn´t unless it is by humanity´s own fault. So far the main wars in Council space have been form a defensive position, vs Rachni (indoctrinated?) and Krogan. FCW seems more the result of trigger happy people on the turian side, and the Alliance answering by going all out without bothering to check the opposition first.

[Sylvianus]

Clonedzero wrote...

if anyone on the normandy is racist its Pressly

Prestley hope that humanity is doing alone, is independ from the Council's power. It's nationalism.

Prestley dislikes Turian because of First War Contact, as some Turian dislike humans because of this.

Prestley admits he was wrong, that Shepard was right with his squad of Alien. You should see the DLC in M2 and his last message.

We see also that the point of view of  Prestly is majority in 2183  among humans. This view must have a majority on Earth. Again, difficult geopolitical context. It is important to take this factor into account.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 09 juin 2011 - 04:10 .

[LPPrince]

Lets stick to Ash and not Pressly, hmm(R.I.P.)?

[Xeranx]

DetailedSubset wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Amitar wrote...

*Speciesism.

It's racism.  Humans are a race.  Turians are a race.  Salarians are a race.  Asari are a race.  Krogan are a race.  Vorcha are a race.  Elcor are a race.  Batarians are a race.  Hanar are a race.  Drell are a race.  That Magog-looking Shadow Broker is a race.

Regardless of whether you're black, brown, yellow, red, or white if a Batarian wanted to take you out you're human first.  Period.  Color and/or ethnicity are a distant second.

Race refers to secondary classifications within a species not different species. Chimpanzee is not a race and neither is Turian.

Then people should stop calling it the human race, no?  Race is incorrect no matter how well justified it is to define secondary characteristics within a species.  The way race is defined is easily replaced by another word we use in regards to animals: breed.

[Clonedzero]

Sylvianus wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

if anyone on the normandy is racist its Pressly

Prestley hope that humanity is doing alone, is independ from the Council's power. It's nationalism.

Prestley dislikes Turian because of First War Contact, as some Turian dislike humans because of this.

Prestley admits he was wrong, that Shepard was right with his squad of Alien. You should see the DLC in M2 and his last message.

We see also hat the point of view of  Prestly is majority in 2183  among humans. This view must have a majority on Earth. Again, diffcult geopolitical context. It is important to take this factor into account.

characters are allowed to be racist and have flaws you know...
and yes ive seen his journal in the normandy crash site, my point was that he's way more racist than ashley was.

i dont see the huge deal with people rabidly defending characters flaws like they dont exist. character flaws are what make characters interesting.

is ashley racist? i wouldnt say so, not the right word. distrustful and suspicious? absolutely.
is that bad? no its a good thing, it gives the player another perspective to look at the game world.

flawed characters are interesting characters, perfect characters are boring characters.

ashley is one of my favorite characters because of her views. she's far more interesting to talk to than tali who will ramble on about the stupid flotilla and immune systems for half an hour, where when you talk to ashley you can talk about more interesting subjects.

[LPPrince]

Alright alright, no need to slam other characters while talking about Ash.

[Sylvianus]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Seriously, I don't know how people have to think she was racist. I'm black, I've never thought of. What she told  to me always seemed to be of realism and pragmatism. And her way of thinking in a difficult geopolitical context is entirely consistent with mine.

2157: First War Contact

2170: Mindoir destroyed

2176 Batarian Blitz on elysium

2178 Torfan

2183: Eden Prime attacked by Geth and Saren.

How can we not be cautious for Humanity in this context ?

The Alliance was on the offensive there. Payback for Elysium. After doing I Remember Me I found it was worth it.

The problem many seem to miss is that aliens are also aliens to themselves. So it´s not humanity vs everyone else. If Asari, Turians and Salarians can manage to live with each other more or less well, no reason why humanity shouldn´t unless it is by humanity´s own fault. So far the main wars in Council space have been form a defensive position, vs Rachni (indoctrinated?) and Krogan. FCW seems more the result of trigger happy people on the turian side, and the Alliance answering by going all out without bothering to check the opposition first.

For torfan, yes it is an attack, but a context of war with an enemy who struck first.

otherwise, I agree. But precisely, humanity is new among the elders who have more experience, she has yet to learn.

The problem is also that its rapid expansion scares the Council ho has never known anything like it, who cares to dominate and ensure stability under his rules.

The humans know it and so they have the impression that the Council is doing everything to keep humanity from becoming more powerful. There is mutual distrust . And it takes time to clear up misunderstandings among the people.

[LPPrince]

Well, gotta understand the alien perspective that humans are vastly expanding way too fast and the fear that comes from that.

[1Minsc1]

Oh no, this "racist-b++++++t" again...

I wrote in an other thread:
"In biology, races are distinct genetically divergent populations within the same species with relatively small morphological and genetic differences. The populations can be described as ecological races if they arise from adaptation to different local habitats or geographic races when they are geographically isolated. If sufficiently different, two or more races can be identified as subspecies, which is an official biological taxonomy unit subordinate to species. If not, they are denoted as races,which means that a formal rank should not be given to the group, or taxonomists are unsure whether or not a formal rank should be given. According to Ernst W. Mayr, "a subspecies is a geographic race that is sufficiently different taxonomically to be worthy of a separate name."       "In biology, a species is one of the basic units of biological classification and a taxonomic  rank. A species is often defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. While in many cases this definition is adequate, more precise or differing measures are often used, such as similarity of DNA, morphology or ecological niche."
both from Wikipedia.

Taking a look at this qoutes it's obvious that humans, krogans, salarians... are different species, not different races.


"Racism is the belief that there are inherent differences in people's traits and capacities which are entirely due to their race, however defined, and which consequently justify those people being treated differently, both socially and legally. Alternatively, racism is the practice of certain group/s of people being treated differently, which is then justified by recourse to racial sterotyping or pseudo-science."
Wikipedia

Racist:
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various [human] races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.


Replace "Racism" by "Specieism", "race" by "species" and so on and we get a proper definition of a "Specieist" in our ME-universe. I think a lot intelligent beeings, who have contact to other species, are Specieist. There are differences in "peoples" traits and capacities, by canon!, not by stereotyping or pseudo-science. And the species are treatend different, Krogans are used for war, and "Council-races" rule. The Volus ambassador had no doubt that the Council should rule, he just want a seat for the volus too.
To come to the point: in our world it's highly morally reprehensible to be a racist, in ME-universe it is not when you are a "specieist". That does not implie that Ash is a "specieist", she never said humans are superior to others and should rule the galaxy. (If you choosed paragon dialouge she said quite the opposite!) Nor want i legitimate the oppression of any species in the ME-universe. I just want to state that "our" words would have different connotations in ME-universe and would be quite inappropiate.

Modifié par 1Minsc1, 09 juin 2011 - 04:27 .

[LPPrince]

Can we just ignore what word someone uses? You know what they mean.

[Temaperacl]

Clonedzero wrote...

i find it kinda crazy how upset everyone is over this.

If you look closer, you will probably find that the people who have an issue are mostly not upset - they are concerned.

Concerned that the visual changes in Ashley's appearance are indicative of changes in the character that BioWare is making or even that BioWare is making changes just for the sake of upping the "sex-factor" for the character.   Maybe concerned for other reasons as well.  I'm not denying that there are people with extreme stances on both sides of the argument, but the majority have been quite reasonable in trying to state why they are concerned about what they have seen.  Likewise, there has been a good amount of valid reasoning put forward on the other side as well.

[Nerevar-as]

LPPrince wrote...

Well, gotta understand the alien perspective that humans are vastly expanding way too fast and the fear that comes from that.

The closest thing they´ve seen is the Krogan expansion. We all know how that finished. What some human characters don´t realize, such as the ambassador from the first book, is that while humanity could do a lot of harm, it hasn´t the means to win. In a way humans are playing the bully card being the weakling relative to the big 3. Not that it´s going to matter much after ME3.

[Sylvianus]

Clonedzero wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

if anyone on the normandy is racist its Pressly

Prestley hope that humanity is doing alone, is independ from the Council's power. It's nationalism.

Prestley dislikes Turian because of First War Contact, as some Turian dislike humans because of this.

Prestley admits he was wrong, that Shepard was right with his squad of Alien. You should see the DLC in M2 and his last message.

We see also hat the point of view of  Prestly is majority in 2183  among humans. This view must have a majority on Earth. Again, diffcult geopolitical context. It is important to take this factor into account.

characters are allowed to be racist and have flaws you know...
and yes ive seen his journal in the normandy crash site, my point was that he's way more racist than ashley was.

i dont see the huge deal with people rabidly defending characters flaws like they dont exist. character flaws are what make characters interesting.

is ashley racist? i wouldnt say so, not the right word. distrustful and suspicious? absolutely.
is that bad? no its a good thing, it gives the player another perspective to look at the game world.

flawed characters are interesting characters, perfect characters are boring characters.

ashley is one of my favorite characters because of her views. she's far more interesting to talk to than tali who will ramble on about the stupid flotilla and immune systems for half an hour, where when you talk to ashley you can talk about more interesting subjects.

I'd lol to you.

It's just your point of view hu. This is not universal you know. I recognize the flaws of people, maybe not the same as you, you know.

No need to take that tone with me, I never said it was necessary that the characters are perfect, do not try to make me say what I never said.

Only I don't agree with you about this. I hope you will tolerate different opinion the next time.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 09 juin 2011 - 04:29 .

[LPPrince]

I wish there was more valid reasoning on both sides than the screaming I've seen that tends to be noticed a bit more.

[LPPrince]

Nerevar-as wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Well, gotta understand the alien perspective that humans are vastly expanding way too fast and the fear that comes from that.

The closest thing they´ve seen is the Krogan expansion. We all know how that finished. What some human characters don´t realize, such as the ambassador from the first book, is that while humanity could do a lot of harm, it hasn´t the means to win. In a way humans are playing the bully card being the weakling relative to the big 3. Not that it´s going to matter much after ME3.

Well, if we all work together, we'll see how perspective changes.

[Clonedzero]

Temaperacl wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

i find it kinda crazy how upset everyone is over this.

If you look closer, you will probably find that the people who have an issue are mostly not upset - they are concerned.

Concerned that the visual changes in Ashley's appearance are indicative of changes in the character that BioWare is making or even that BioWare is making changes just for the sake of upping the "sex-factor" for the character.   Maybe concerned for other reasons as well.  I'm not denying that there are people with extreme stances on both sides of the argument, but the majority have been quite reasonable in trying to state why they are concerned about what they have seen.  Likewise, there has been a good amount of valid reasoning put forward on the other side as well.

but her hair and new light armor (its light armor not a catsuit) arent that big of a deal. people are acting as if it fundementally changes her entire character based on seeing her once, and its not even that good of a look at her either.

[Clonedzero]

Sylvianus wrote...

I'd lol to you.

It's just your point of view hu. This is not universal you know. I recognize the flaws of people, maybe not the same as you, you know.

No need to take that tone with me, I never said it was necessary that the characters are perfect, do not try to make me say what I never said.

Only I don't agree with you about this. I hope you will tolerate different opinion the next time.

no, you misunderstand. i'm not intolerant of others opinions, i just happen to disagree with the huge sentiment that a character flaw such as "racism" (not the quotes lol) is a bad thing for a character.

like my first playthrough in ME1 when i left the citadel after recruiting garrus, wrex and tali. i went down and talked to ashley and she brought up "maybe we shouldnt be letting them look at all our classified military hardware" and i thought "you got a point there"

in real life if the US and say france (random allied county no one take offense please), were to do a joint operation somewhere and the US was using for example the F-22 raptor, we wouldnt let the french guys we're allied with poke around and look at it, not because of racism or even mistrust, its just our damn jet lol.

but another point, what makes her a strong character is that she has her own opinions on things, good or bad, she has them. she's not a character who just agrees with everything the player makes, she'll tell you when she thinks you're wrong or right.  so when people get upset that she's "racist" or whatever i just find it odd because her mistrust of aliens is something that makes her interesting because as a character she's a good person overall.

people who freak about her being racist but are apparently ok with other characters being complete sociopaths who kill innocents boggle my mind. cus personally, i find being racist alot more tollerable than someone being a murderous sociopath lol.

[Garlador]

I am VERY eager to see how Ashley acts in this game, especially considering everything that happened in ME2.

For starters, I romanced (but did not sleep with) Miranda in ME1, but I got upset at her in ME2 when she chewed me out and refused to support me. Then I fell for Tali and I'm sticking with Tali.

Considering Ashley's prejudice about aliens (not necessarily xenophobia or racism, just prejudice), I wonder how she'll respond. Liara was very supportive of Tali and I's relationship, but I don't see Ashley taking it well; even if she warms up to aliens in ME1, she doesn't exactly love 'em, and I ditched her for a three-toed, three-fingered, chicken-legged, gas-mask wearing space gypsy with huge hips. I imagine the love triangle confrontation would be much more heated than the others.

Perhaps her makeover is to get attention back to herself and away from Liara/Tali/Miranda/etc.

Regardless, I do find it ridiculous people are saying she can't be sexy or act womanly. She is a woman, and a hot one, but stick her next to Samara, Miranda, or Jack and she still comes across as the most conservative soldier there.

But I want to see how she acts. What made her come to her senses and join you know? How will she take being dumped? Will she try and seduce me away from my special Quarian? Interesting things that have yet to be explained or explored from her.

[Temaperacl]

LPPrince wrote...

I wish there was more valid reasoning on both sides than the screaming I've seen that tends to be noticed a bit more.

I don't know - there is a large amount of "screaming" that is going on, but that occurs on any internet forum.  If you ignore most of that, there are a fair number of reasonable points being brought up (Even if, as this is an internet forum, most of them are ignored by the opposite side):

The ones come to mind first are (Not saying that these are all agreed upon, just that these are some of the reasonable arguments I remember seeing in this thread):

- Tight catsuit
+ The armor being used is no tighter than many of the ME1 armors, especially the one without hard shells.
+ Armor Tech could have advanced
- Some male characters that have been seen have been wearing visibly heavier armor.
+ [Conjecture] Could be casual wear
- No evidence yet of casual / combat wear distinction for ME3
- Gap at top of uniform
- More prominent chest

- Boots [Heels, specifically] are less practical, more "pretty"
+ These heels seem to match up with the heels for running shoes or other performance shoes

- Hair is impractical for a combat situation
+ [Conjecture] Could be casual and she hasn't had time to change
- No evidence yet of casual / combat wear distinction

[theelementslayer]

Temaperacl wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

I wish there was more valid reasoning on both sides than the screaming I've seen that tends to be noticed a bit more.

I don't know - there is a large amount of "screaming" that is going on, but that occurs on any internet forum.  If you ignore most of that, there are a fair number of reasonable points being brought up (Even if, as this is an internet forum, most of them are ignored by the opposite side):

The ones come to mind first are (Not saying that these are all agreed upon, just that these are some of the reasonable arguments I remember seeing in this thread):

- Tight catsuit
+ The armor being used is no tighter than many of the ME1 armors, especially the one without hard shells.
+ Armor Tech could have advanced
- Some male characters that have been seen have been wearing visibly heavier armor.
+ [Conjecture] Could be casual wear
- No evidence yet of casual / combat wear distinction for ME3
- Gap at top of uniform
- More prominent chest

- Boots [Heels, specifically] are less practical, more "pretty"
+ These heels seem to match up with the heels for running shoes or other performance shoes

- Hair is impractical for a combat situation
+ [Conjecture] Could be casual and she hasn't had time to change
- No evidence yet of casual / combat wear distinction

^ That, that is just awesome 

[MACharlie1]

Been trying to get Bioware to simply answer yes or no to Ashley wearing a jumpsuit for the whole game or armor. No success...maybe once we see a video of Kaidan on Earth it'll clear things up.

[Sylvianus]

Clonedzero wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

I'd lol to you.

It's just your point of view hu. This is not universal you know. I recognize the flaws of people, maybe not the same as you, you know.

No need to take that tone with me, I never said it was necessary that the characters are perfect, do not try to make me say what I never said.

Only I don't agree with you about this. I hope you will tolerate different opinion the next time.

no, you misunderstand. i'm not intolerant of others opinions, i just happen to disagree with the huge sentiment that a character flaw such as "racism" (not the quotes lol) is a bad thing for a character.

like my first playthrough in ME1 when i left the citadel after recruiting garrus, wrex and tali. i went down and talked to ashley and she brought up "maybe we shouldnt be letting them look at all our classified military hardware" and i thought "you got a point there"

in real life if the US and say france (random allied county no one take offense please), were to do a joint operation somewhere and the US was using for example the F-22 raptor, we wouldnt let the french guys we're allied with poke around and look at it, not because of racism or even mistrust, its just our damn jet lol.

but another point, what makes her a strong character is that she has her own opinions on things, good or bad, she has them. she's not a character who just agrees with everything the player makes, she'll tell you when she thinks you're wrong or right.  so when people get upset that she's "racist" or whatever i just find it odd because her mistrust of aliens is something that makes her interesting because as a character she's a good person overall.

people who freak about her being racist but are apparently ok with other characters being complete sociopaths who kill innocents boggle my mind. cus personally, i find being racist alot more tollerable than someone being a murderous sociopath lol.

Oh, ok ! Sorry, I misunderstood.
But, otherwise, I agree with you.

[Temaperacl]

Clonedzero wrote...

Temaperacl wrote...
If you look closer, you will probably find that the people who have an issue are mostly not upset - they are concerned.

Concerned that the visual changes in Ashley's appearance are indicative of changes in the character that BioWare is making or even that BioWare is making changes just for the sake of upping the "sex-factor" for the character.   Maybe concerned for other reasons as well.  I'm not denying that there are people with extreme stances on both sides of the argument, but the majority have been quite reasonable in trying to state why they are concerned about what they have seen.  Likewise, there has been a good amount of valid reasoning put forward on the other side as well.

but her hair and new light armor (its light armor not a catsuit) arent that big of a deal. people are acting as if it fundementally changes her entire character based on seeing her once, and its not even that good of a look at her either.

I agree about the armor - I just finished a playthrough of ME1 last week, so it is pretty fresh in my mind how light the armor in the ME universe can be even in the first installment. 

And yes, people are reacting to small amounts of information, but it is the only information we have available so far. If you are going to say that people should wait for a certain amount of information before reacting to it, then how much information should that be? 

The argument that the appearance fundamentally changes her character is obviously somethign people are in disagreement about - I think the point is that people don't want it to completely change her character  (and they want her character and appearance to match, of course) and therefore they are concerned by what they see vs how Ash was in ME1 and Horizon. If how Ash looks in what we have seen so far is indicative of how she looks through the entire game, then people are saying that they think it will go against what we learned in ME1 and so is either a character change or a poor connection between graphics and character design.

Modifié par Temaperacl, 09 juin 2011 - 05:08 .

[Antivenger]

Temaperacl wrote...

And yes, people are reacting to small amounts of information, but it is the only information we have available so far. If you are going to say that people should wait for a certain amount of information before reacting to it, then how much information should that be? 

The argument that the appearance fundamentally changes her character is obviously somethign people are in disagreement about - I think the point is that people don't want it to completely change her character  (and they want her character and appearance to match, of course) and therefore they are concerned by what they see vs how Ash was in ME1 and Horizon. If how Ash looks in what we have seen so far is indicative of how she looks through the entire game, then people are saying that they think it will go against what we learned in ME1 and so is either a character change or a poor connection between graphics and character design.

Then again, there are many people up in arms about her design who don't actually like her character. More being concerned with the oversexualisation of women and Mirandasisation. You have some good points, but I can't really contribute much since I like how she looks

[Ice Cold J]

Oblivious wrote...

Did you honestly make an account just for that one comment?

I'm guessing, "yes."

Mwames wrote...

I haven't really been catching up with the conversation, but I just want to say that if she doesn't slap on a hardsuit, I'll be pissed. She looks like Miranda 2.0, which isn't a good thing...

I agree... to a point.

There's nothing wrong with Miranda, IMO. She's a "femme fatale," if you will. A spy who uses EVERY advantage she has to get an edge. If she is attractive, why not highlight that? It happens in the real world all the time. Today, my mother was PISSED because some young woman wearing a low-cut dress had a store attendant trying to pander to her every whim, but when my mother asked the SAME guy for help after the other woman was finished, he barked directions to her and took off.

I'd prefer to see Ashley as she was in ME1. A soldier. Sure, she's a Spectre now, but Shep's armor didn't change when he became a Spectre. He had other armor options. So did Ash. Why does she have to (seemingly) be all about the sex appeal? Sure, as a Spectre, she'd want to use every advantage she has as well, but her personality seems to say that she'd get info through less subtle means than her shapely figure.