114 réponses à ce sujet

[CDRSkyShepard]

CrutchCricket wrote...

I think your definitions are still being too exacting and not giving enough credit to AI development. AIs are more than just machines or software, they are actual lifeforms albeit synthetic ones. Obvious examples besides EDI ares the geth (though they would be a more interesting case to study in a debate like this due to how they function). No way to process emotions? Organic life forms are largely mechanical in the sense that most of what comprises us is a physical system, subject to physical laws. AIs are nothing but processing power. The ability to feel, to think is done with only what 20-30% of our being? An entity that is purely mind, or purely software could potentially process emotions with the entirety of its being- really AIs should be able to experience emotions much deeper than any organics. See Legion's speech about hardware vs software. There are many routes I could argue this (including a philosophical examination of perception- Berkeley anyone?) but I don't have the time right now for all of them.

I also wouldn't take Mordin's quote too literally. Remember he Sherlock-scans everything and does it out loud.  "Simulated emotional inflections"- is only a inference in the middle of his train of thought- it's not his conclusion. He has no reason to presuppose an AI but more reason to assume a VI. And recall Maelon: "You always had trouble dealing with facts that didn't fit with your theories". Mordin it seems sometimes makes the cardinal mistake Holmes always warns against- constructing a theory before you have all the facts. Even all this aside, Mordin may not think much of AI and he might carry a biological bias- which many people do.

You, sir, are a worthy opponent! En garde! (Haha, I jest, I jest.)

But no, seriously...we could get into that perception debate and be there FOREVER. I'd rather not go into it, either, but I will say that just because something was programmed to act a certain way so that we'd percieve it that way, doesn't mean it's actually "feeling" anything. EDI was most likely programmed to simulate emotion, so that we could connect to her as human beings...but was she programmed with actual emotions? I don't think so, mostly because I don't even know if it's possible for an AI to feel anything in the first place. Having emotions is something that is associated solely with the human condition, as a result of our evolution out of a dangerous existence. Then again that is yet another debate.

I will lend credence to your argument that AI's are capable of being so much more than just a slave to their programming, and have a lot of processing power in comparison to humans. However, we humans were built to have, or evolved to have, emotion. AI's, not necessarily. Just because an AI might have the processing power and capability to understand or even have emotion, doesn't mean that it has the necessary programming (or hardware) to do so. I don't think AIs "naturally" have emotions...it's kind of counter-intuitive. intelligence does not necessarily mean the capacity or ability to process emotion (my ex-boyfriend would be a perfect example <_<). It's kind of like my graphics card...it has the processing power to run ME2, in theory, but the minute ME2 starts up on my computer, it dies. Why? Because the game wasn't designed to run on an Intel graphics card, which is what mine is. My card is integrated, so I can't replace it without damaging the rest of the system, so I can't make my computer able to play ME2. So, even if we can suspend our disbelief here and say that we could give AI's legitimate emotions...not just make other people think they do...would we be able to give them that gift? Would they know what to do with it?

Case in point: the emotion chip from Star Trek: The Next Generation. It is a device that is designed to try and make Dr. Soong's androids be able to process and legitimately have emotions...whereas they might have smiled before to give the illusion they were happy, they can now smile because they are genuinely happy. When we first see it, Doctor Soong, Data's creator, is trying to give it to Data instead of Data's twin, Lore, because Lore's a sadistic piece of work and Soong thinks Data will use it better. However, Lore gets the chip through his usual subterfuge and it basically drives him mad. Because of this, Data isn't sure if he should be able to have the ability to feel emotions...if it would be too much for him. When he does decide to install it, it causes him some problems. Eventually, he does integrate it into his systems, but he rarely uses it. Why? Well, we're never given a reason why, but seeing as how the Borg queen was so very easily able to manipulate them in Star Trek: First Contact, he probably decided it was way more advantagous not to use them. We saw almost no mention of his emotion chip in the two movies following First Contact, and the fact that he was so easily undermined because of his emotions in that movie is my leading theory into why we basically never saw him "switch on" his emotions again. Does that mean he never did? No. But he did use it a lot less...we'd have seen him use it again if he'd resumed using it as he did in Generations and First Contact.

Another reason why AIs are so endearing in the sci-fi world is that they don't really understand organic species, because they legitimately cannot feel emotion, and therefore don't understand why we find certain things humorous, or why we cry out of joy instead of strictly out of sadness...that sort of thing.

If I made a computer as smart as I could, and even gave it the ability to think for itself and evolve...could I come to consider it a friend? Sure. But me being paranoid won't discount the possibility that it could betray me if it thought it was logical to do so. However, I would expect it to be able to develop a certain sense of loyalty, purely because I would become comfortable and predictable to it. But, any "emotion" I program into it would merely be a mimmick of what organic species are capable of...we have a unique chemistry that causes us to do what we do, emotionally - horomones are one such example - that AIs simply lack. Could we re-create that? Could AIs learn to re-create that and possibly be able to legitimately feel things and be human a la the Cylons of Battlestar Galactica? Sure. I don't discount that possibility in the least. But, here's the thing...I don't think human engineering as of the 22nd century is advanced enough (reverse-engineered Reaper tech is still reverse-engineered by humans) for us to truly be able to play God and create AIs that are emotionally, mentally, physically, and psychologically on par with humans, or even more than that. You say I don't give enough credit to AI development, I say you give too much. It's a technology that has wildly complex implications...I don't think we can pretend to know every variable.

Then again, is the term "AI psychology" a paradox? Perhaps. If BioWare fleshes EDI out, I sure hope they address that one.

Edit: You're very welcome, HolyAvenger. You deserve it!

Modifié par CDRSkyShepard, 30 décembre 2011 - 05:26 .

[Eliantariel]

I agree with Sky - the question if an AI can have real emotions or not is something you can debate for years. Together with the additional questions if we have a free will and what reality is.

The understanding of our own biology and our knowledge about technology is not enough to answer the question, how far a computer program can evolve yet. Maybe in some years or decades who knows. Just as a reminder: similarities to human behaviour does not make a human. Take a flame for example. It can grow, create offspring, it can be extinguished, it reacts on environmental change... but it is not even alive.

Even if an AI would evolve feelings - would this AI still be bound to its programing? And what if its "feelings" would be in contradiction to its programing? A computer program can only act in the way how it was considered by the programer. Don't forget that a computer program is made by ourselfes, while humans (and other living beings) had millions of time to evolve.

As this is a fictional setting, Bioware could simply state that an AI in this universe is or is not able to evolve feelings.

This is of course my personal opinion, but if EDI is the Normandy I don't want her to evolve feelings that could endanger the ship. Lets say EDI evolves feelings. Would her feelings have an influence on her actions? What if she has a bad day? Would her feelings be random (e.g. one minute bad mood the next minute good mood but without something happening that would turn her down...)?

If Bioware doesn't like a JokerxShepard romance, I would be more happier if Joker would get an actual living girl-friend, like e.g. Kelly. It would still be disappointing, because I think that Joker would be a great romance option for Shepard (several reasons for this can be found in the op of the Joker romance thread). And there is a great fan base for this pairing. But of course Bioware won't and can't fullfill all requests and I am grateful that they spend time to see what the fans like to see.

[HolyAvenger]

FWIW, because this is a pretty philosophical topic that I think goes far beyond Joker/EDI, I started another thread in the GD forum here http://social.biowar...3/index/8897923

[Random citizen]

The problem with AIs are a version of a problem that in philosophy are referred to as "the problem of others minds". Of course it is impossible the know how it is to be EDI (or Drell, Asari and so on)
The problem gets even harder when we dont even know how our own minds work. But its seems to be far better to treat someone or something with respect and consideration then not.

EDI could possibly have even "more developed" "feelings" then any human, but it might be true that she she simulates what we would call human emotion, as she definitely is not human, but still needs to communicate with us using our primitive code.

[android654]

Random citizen wrote...

The problem with AIs are a version of a problem that in philosophy are referred to as "the problem of others minds". Of course it is impossible the know how it is to be EDI (or Drell, Asari and so on)
The problem gets even harder when we dont even know how our own minds work. But its seems to be far better to treat someone or something with respect and consideration then not.

EDI could possibly have even "more developed" "feelings" then any human, but it might be true that she she simulates what we would call human emotion, as she definitely is not human, but still needs to communicate with us using our primitive code.

But if emotions aren't natural to an AI isn't it all learned behavior? I've always thought the concept of an AI or even a simpler Learning AI which is much more common is more closely tied to the domestication of dogs rather than a child learning to mimic emotions. It can simulate them, but there will always be a glimmer of doubt that will make you question the genuine nature of those actions.

[SgtPepper667]

That's the problem I have with it. EDI can learn how to mimic human emotions, but that's all it would be...and when would it go too far? What if Joker and EDI broke up and she revolted? We could possibly have another geth/quarian incident. Or...HAL 9000...

Modifié par SgtPepper667, 30 décembre 2011 - 09:23 .

[kojac.ghosper]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

blah blah blah snark on the ex blah blah

 It's kind of like my graphics card...it has the processing power to run ME2, in theory, but the minute ME2 starts up on my computer, it dies. Why? Because the game wasn't designed to run on an Intel graphics card, which is what mine is. My card is integrated, so I can't replace it without damaging the rest of the system,

blah blah blah AI blah blah emotions

IF you have a tower, you can toss an additional video card onto your mobo via pci/pci-e/pci-x slot.
IF you're running on a laptop, you can spend more money for less performance on what is likely offered as a higher end graphics package, which is really just a crappy custom you-can-cram-this-into-a-laptop graphics card, or worse, if it's and old laptop, buy it on ebay.

So yes, you can upgrade your video card. No, it won't hurt your computer. No, you don't have to try and rip your GPU off your mobo.

    Oh look, a cat!
           /\\___/\\
           \\  -.-  /
           `-.^.-'
              /"\\  
       Nope.
       Chuck Testa.

Modifié par kojac.ghosper, 30 décembre 2011 - 09:27 .

[CDRSkyShepard]

HolyAvenger wrote...

FWIW, because this is a pretty philosophical topic that I think goes far beyond Joker/EDI, I started another thread in the GD forum here http://social.biowar...3/index/8897923

I agree, and I also think that we can debate whether or not EDI has "real" feelings until the game comes out and beyond.

My biggest concern with EDI at the moment is that if she gains autonomy, which she will have to to romance Joker, is that she'd turn into a Number Six wannabe. This same thing has been done already...the whole "AI and human companionship thing" was a huge theme in Battlestar Galactica. I don't want Mass Effect 3 to become "Battlestar Galactica: Part Two." AIs will have their place in the world, and the AI ethics debate will undoubtedly be a nice and critical addition to the Mass Effect 3 story line, but I dunno, AI romance isn't something I'd touch with a 10 foot pole as a writer.

Then again, the whole Cortana/MC thing in Halo made me cringe, so it may just be me. But...it did make a lot of people go, "Why...did they do that?"

[mauro2222]

Aww... come on! I only played Halo Combat Evolved, but Cortana is a human without body.

If those two are happy with each other, then so be it.

[Double_02]

Tasha vas Nar Rayya wrote...

Inter-species relationships are seen a lot in the Mass Effect universe. But there is never anything mentioned about a relationship with an AI... I think that the banter between them was only supposed to show the development of what was first Joker not trusting EDI. And then to them engaging in friendly banter, yet keeping up the pretense that they hate each other. I don't think that Bioware intended to have people think that they were ever going into engage in a serious relationship.

I'm not ruling it out, but I would be VERY surprised if something like that happened in ME3. It would be like being in a relationship with a talking, intelligent toaster, with a drawing of a hot woman on.

Ok, not quite like that, but you catch my drift

This sums it up nicely.

[Random citizen]

android654 wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

The problem with AIs are a version of a problem that in philosophy are referred to as "the problem of others minds". Of course it is impossible the know how it is to be EDI (or Drell, Asari and so on)
The problem gets even harder when we dont even know how our own minds work. But its seems to be far better to treat someone or something with respect and consideration then not.

EDI could possibly have even "more developed" "feelings" then any human, but it might be true that she she simulates what we would call human emotion, as she definitely is not human, but still needs to communicate with us using our primitive code.

But if emotions aren't natural to an AI isn't it all learned behavior? I've always thought the concept of an AI or even a simpler Learning AI which is much more common is more closely tied to the domestication of dogs rather than a child learning to mimic emotions. It can simulate them, but there will always be a glimmer of doubt that will make you question the genuine nature of those actions.

First of all. Feelings as far as we currently understand them in science, are a product of the mammalian brain (non-mamals might have something similar, but it is hard for us to know or grasp). Any sufficiently intelligent and social lifeform can learn to mimic emotions “on top on” the emotions they are actually experiencing. This applies to both dogs and small children as they both can fake or "manipulate" to get what they want.

When it comes to AI like EDI it might be the equivalent of an actor playing a role that is much more stupid
then she is, as well as playing the role on her second language.

We know that EDI had problems with telling jokes. She might not have a human sense of humour, but if she has it might both be more advanced or much more primitive then ours.
Or it might be very alien. It might also be that she can modulate and evolve her cognitions by assigning more processing power and write/use more efficient code.

Alsio, being devoid of human emotions does not mean that there are only emptiness or "a negative lacking"

Modifié par Random citizen, 31 décembre 2011 - 03:32 .

[HolyAvenger]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

HolyAvenger wrote...

FWIW, because this is a pretty philosophical topic that I think goes far beyond Joker/EDI, I started another thread in the GD forum here http://social.biowar...3/index/8897923

I agree, and I also think that we can debate whether or not EDI has "real" feelings until the game comes out and beyond.

My biggest concern with EDI at the moment is that if she gains autonomy, which she will have to to romance Joker, is that she'd turn into a Number Six wannabe. This same thing has been done already...the whole "AI and human companionship thing" was a huge theme in Battlestar Galactica. I don't want Mass Effect 3 to become "Battlestar Galactica: Part Two." AIs will have their place in the world, and the AI ethics debate will undoubtedly be a nice and critical addition to the Mass Effect 3 story line, but I dunno, AI romance isn't something I'd touch with a 10 foot pole as a writer.

Then again, the whole Cortana/MC thing in Halo made me cringe, so it may just be me. But...it did make a lot of people go, "Why...did they do that?"

See I reckon that's where you and I differ. I liked BSG's take on it, and I want to see BioWare's as I think it will be a) quite different and well-written. Of course it'd be tough to pull off, but it would be going somewhere not a lot of SF has gone (especially if it goes in a positive direction). I think its quite natural that once AI's evolve to feel emotions, love can't be far behind....

[Homebound]

to me a joker/edi romance is like that news article about some dude in japan marrying his dating sim game.

[Ticktank]

Joker and EDI are both fictional characters though.

[The_11thDoctor]

Im all for this. I want this to happen as a thing to have on my checklist of must haves for ME3. I want them to create a cyber body for EDI to move around in and romance him that way. She's physically in the life support area behind the med-lab, but in the cockpit and can be accessed all over the ship. I dont see how making a mobile body could be impossible. Heck, she could look like a physical version of the access system on the Citadel. I cant remember, but they were like robotic Asari made of a laser hologram?

[CDRSkyShepard]

HolyAvenger wrote...

See I reckon that's where you and I differ. I liked BSG's take on it, and I want to see BioWare's as I think it will be a) quite different and well-written. Of course it'd be tough to pull off, but it would be going somewhere not a lot of SF has gone (especially if it goes in a positive direction). I think its quite natural that once AI's evolve to feel emotions, love can't be far behind....

I liked the way Battlestar handled it a lot, actually, and that's part of my fear...that BioWare will try to do it in a similar way and make it seem like they're ripping off BSG. I wouldn't want that to happen for them, you know? It would be really easy to draw parallels because Tricia Helfer voices EDI, too. I also hope they don't make it a major theme, just a big theme along with a bunch of other big themes...if they make too big a deal out of it, it will definitely start looking like BSG. I mean, I can't say that for sure, but I can see it happening rather easily.

Also, I think it's important to remember that EDI is humanity's first (that we know of) AI construct. It would seem implausible to me that we could engineer something (even if she's engineered from Reaper tech, she still had to be reverse-engineered and programmed by humans...not an infallible race by any stretch) so perfectly the first time around. The Cylons of BSG took many years to evolve from killing machines to true living entities. It took several decades, and we're talking about EDI making similar leaps in what, 6 months? She is also very much a prototype system, so I'd have a hard time believing that Cerberus built an AI that advanced in the 2 years between ME1 and ME2. In pretty much all sci-fi, the development of the AIs we know and love took a single team or scientist decades of research and development. True, Cerberus must've had a team developing AI technology (and the Alliance, illegally as we saw in Revelation) before ME1, but they only had the Reaper tech that EDI is so heavily based on for 2 years. That probably sped up the process considerably to develop a smart weapons platform, which EDI is, but I don't think they could have engineered an AI capable of being so advanced in that amount of time.

There's also the issue of giving EDI a body: the idea is such a fanservice, it's not even funny. The same kind of fanservice that put Seven of Nine in a catsuit and made Cylons sexy (as opposed to the original Battlestar Cylons). It's so unnecessary, even if EDI is unshackled. She says it herself: she views the Normandy as her physical being. I actually quite like that concept, as it hasn't been touched on much before: the ship itself is artificially intelligent. The only other time I can think of that has been done is in 2001, and even then, I'm not sure if HAL thought of the ship as his physical form.

Okay, kind of random, but I just thought of something when referring to EDI as "her" and HAL as "him." Can AIs even have genders, really? Or do their creators program them to have genders? In that case...do male AIs think like males, and female AIs think like females? I'm gonna have to go think more on that one... But, suffice to say, if AIs don't really have genders, it would be interesting to have species with genders romance them.

Modifié par CDRSkyShepard, 01 janvier 2012 - 12:36 .

[XEternalXDreamsX]

Well, EDI has always been the same throughout my play through except for the fact that her "emotions" seem to be what she can get in reaction from the organic in return. Joker is the only one who could "love" her as far his love for flying a ship installed with an A.I.

Cerberus would not have developed an A.I. with emotions (if that's even possible because it does not go beyond what can be seen/felt from source development or human interactions. So the only thing an A.I. can produce is viable corrective actions to what it feels is best for a certain situation from creator unless A.I. can override the process, give obtained/obtainable information, and various things. If Shepard kisses Legion, Legion will not feel anything from embarrassment, love, hyped flow of any emotion but Legion can understand what it means and take best course of action in return to the organic's action. Since Legion can understand a kiss means affection, Legion's process could be to 'please' Shepard with words to portray a human (geth do not, but it's A.I. is an example) , or some kinds of way to "return" those feelings. Even though Legion does not FEEL the pleasure or anything, it returns the emotions just like if someone shot at it. So EDI is the same way.. If EDI got a body sort of like Legion with a female look, she will understand what Joker is trying to do to her but she will not gain anything from reacting with love. But..there is so many what if's that may example is no good to begin with. lol

[Vanguardforwin]

Hellbound555 wrote...

to me a joker/edi romance is like that news article about some dude in japan marrying his dating sim game.

Well it was a character on the game. And I'm sure some folks here would do the same. 

[Double_02]

Happy New Year, EDI fans.

EDI rocks!

[Confused-Shepard]

Perfect opportunity for Bioware to go all metaphysical and discuss what makes us human.
The whole, can a computer feel love, have AI advanced enough to the point they can be considered people? Joker could be the first ROBO-SEXUAL (LOL Futurama!). They kind of did this with Legion

[Vanguardforwin]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Perfect opportunity for Bioware to go all metaphysical and discuss what makes us human.
The whole, can a computer feel love, have AI advanced enough to the point they can be considered people? Joker could be the first ROBO-SEXUAL (LOL Futurama!). They kind of did this with Legion

If anyone can do an AI romance right, it's probably going to be Bioware.

[HolyAvenger]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...

I liked the way Battlestar handled it a lot, actually, and that's part of my fear...that BioWare will try to do it in a similar way and make it seem like they're ripping off BSG. I wouldn't want that to happen for them, you know? It would be really easy to draw parallels because Tricia Helfer voices EDI, too. I also hope they don't make it a major theme, just a big theme along with a bunch of other big themes...if they make too big a deal out of it, it will definitely start looking like BSG. I mean, I can't say that for sure, but I can see it happening rather easily.

Also, I think it's important to remember that EDI is humanity's first (that we know of) AI construct. It would seem implausible to me that we could engineer something (even if she's engineered from Reaper tech, she still had to be reverse-engineered and programmed by humans...not an infallible race by any stretch) so perfectly the first time around. The Cylons of BSG took many years to evolve from killing machines to true living entities. It took several decades, and we're talking about EDI making similar leaps in what, 6 months? She is also very much a prototype system, so I'd have a hard time believing that Cerberus built an AI that advanced in the 2 years between ME1 and ME2. In pretty much all sci-fi, the development of the AIs we know and love took a single team or scientist decades of research and development. True, Cerberus must've had a team developing AI technology (and the Alliance, illegally as we saw in Revelation) before ME1, but they only had the Reaper tech that EDI is so heavily based on for 2 years. That probably sped up the process considerably to develop a smart weapons platform, which EDI is, but I don't think they could have engineered an AI capable of being so advanced in that amount of time.

There's also the issue of giving EDI a body: the idea is such a fanservice, it's not even funny. The same kind of fanservice that put Seven of Nine in a catsuit and made Cylons sexy (as opposed to the original Battlestar Cylons). It's so unnecessary, even if EDI is unshackled. She says it herself: she views the Normandy as her physical being. I actually quite like that concept, as it hasn't been touched on much before: the ship itself is artificially intelligent. The only other time I can think of that has been done is in 2001, and even then, I'm not sure if HAL thought of the ship as his physical form.

Okay, kind of random, but I just thought of something when referring to EDI as "her" and HAL as "him." Can AIs even have genders, really? Or do their creators program them to have genders? In that case...do male AIs think like males, and female AIs think like females? I'm gonna have to go think more on that one... But, suffice to say, if AIs don't really have genders, it would be interesting to have species with genders romance them.

Hmm well BSG had an entirely different set of mythology and symbolism regarding the Cylons that meant that they were very different to what the treatment of AIs has to be in ME. Even practically, the whole biological compatability thing meant an entirely different set of viewpoints had to develop regarding AIs. Obviously BW will have to go in a completely different directions. Hence I can't see there being too much similarity in the two treatments (apart from some generic level of sympathy).

Remember that AIs develop for themselves. The humans had to only get to a certain level before she took over and started learning for herself. As to whether she's the first attempt- clearly not, according to one ME1 side-mission (or the implications thereof anyway). I suspect that clandestine human research into AIs has been ongoing for decades and I wouldn't be surprised to meet more AIs in ME3. But agreed that the temporal aspects of EDI's development are hard-to-believe. But that's hardly the only timeline problem in the overarching storyline. 

I'm not too stressed about that. I can understand the need for an avatar-body in order to do some things she can't do in the space-ship body. Heck just for practical reasons of self-repair and maintenance she should probably have a humanoid form. I won't argue about the fact that its fanservice-y...but have you played ME1/2 recently? Skintight clothing, blue-skinned bisexual space babes, sexy badboy assassins. Fanservice already abounds in the game to such an extent that I would hardly call a sexy body for EDI over the top.

Playing with gender and what it means? Again an established trait in the ME'verse. I'm always curious as to how and why feminine terms are applied to asari. Surely it can't come from their own language? Their own language wouldn't even differentiate between male and female. Maybe as AIs evolve in their quantum bluebox they choose their own gender as befits their personality traits. Maybe they switch over the course of their lives. Who knows? Would love to see BW explore this too. 

[Wynne]

Vanguardforwin wrote...

If anyone can do an AI romance right, it's probably going to be Bioware.

Doing it right would be doing it AI-on-AI. Human-on-AI would practically be pedophilia because humans have much more life experience than a just-born AI which suddenly gets emotions and/or a body.

Up for EDI/Legion? That would be cute and charming.

HolyAvenger wrote...

See I reckon that's where you and I differ. I liked BSG's take on it, and I want to see BioWare's as I think it will be a) quite different and well-written. Of course it'd be tough to pull off, but it would be going somewhere not a lot of SF has gone (especially if it goes in a positive direction). I think its quite natural that once AI's evolve to feel emotions, love can't be far behind....

I might agree with that, if not for the fact that only BSG has really done this at least in recent years, and it would be the same freaking actress that played the seductive human-AI in the tv series.

No, they must not do Joker/EDI. It's an insult to their only "differently abled" character if he can only get a synthetic woman, and it would be a cheap, lame, projectile-vomit-inducing move derivative of BSG and capitalizing on Tricia Helfer's major claim to fame. It takes her role from being "a gal Data would've loved to hang with, whose conversations with Legion are awesome" to being "the creepy computerized woman-child who is conveniently molded into Joker's perfect Cortana-girlfriend, making every female who comes within a mile of ME3 cringe with revulsion." There is so much wrong with the idea that I can't even begin to express my nausea at the thought, and it has only grown with the passing months.

Let's do the Solomon test--am I being influenced by my love of Joker/Shepard, here? No. Because Joker/EDI makes me immediately scream, "Give him a girlfriend! Force me to watch them make out every time I walk on board the Normandy! Make him giggle and blush, whatever, just don't take away my EDI." 

And by "my EDI", I mean the EDI which is an actual interesting character and not a creepy sexploitation robot woman-child. Who, as Sky was saying, IS the Normandy.

Tricia Helfer's looks are exploited all over the place. I like that there is finally a role in which her *acting* has been spotlighted, and that alone. I want them to stick to their guns on that, not cave to the cheesy B-movie appeal of a sexbot.

HolyAvenger wrote...

I won't argue about the fact that
its fanservice-y...but have you played ME1/2 recently? Skintight
clothing, blue-skinned bisexual space babes, sexy badboy assassins.
Fanservice already abounds in the game to such an extent that I would
hardly call a sexy body for EDI over the top.

Yeah, the fact that fanservice abounds? Means that the two characters who are our only refuge from that rampant fanservice must remain a refuge.

Fin.

Modifié par Wynne, 02 janvier 2012 - 09:12 .

[Vanguardforwin]

Wynne wrote...

Vanguardforwin wrote...

If anyone can do an AI romance right, it's probably going to be Bioware.

Doing it right would be doing it AI-on-AI. Human-on-AI would practically be pedophilia because humans have much more life experience than a just-born AI which suddenly gets emotions and/or a body.

Up for EDI/Legion? That would be cute and charming.

HolyAvenger wrote...

See I reckon that's where you and I differ. I liked BSG's take on it, and I want to see BioWare's as I think it will be a) quite different and well-written. Of course it'd be tough to pull off, but it would be going somewhere not a lot of SF has gone (especially if it goes in a positive direction). I think its quite natural that once AI's evolve to feel emotions, love can't be far behind....

I might agree with that, if not for the fact that only BSG has really done this at least in recent years, and it would be the same freaking actress that played the seductive human-AI in the tv series.

No, they must not do Joker/EDI. It's an insult to their only "differently abled" character if he can only get a synthetic woman, and it would be a cheap, lame, projectile-vomit-inducing move derivative of BSG and capitalizing on Tricia Helfer's major claim to fame. It takes her role from being "a gal Data would've loved to hang with, whose conversations with Legion are awesome" to being "the creepy computerized woman-child who is conveniently molded into Joker's perfect Cortana-girlfriend, making every female who comes within a mile of ME3 cringe with revulsion." There is so much wrong with the idea that I can't even begin to express my nausea at the thought, and it has only grown with the passing months.

Let's do the Solomon test--am I being influenced by my love of Joker/Shepard, here? No. Because Joker/EDI makes me immediately scream, "Give him a girlfriend! Force me to watch them make out every time I walk on board the Normandy! Make him giggle and blush, whatever, just don't take away my EDI." 

And by "my EDI", I mean the EDI which is an actual interesting character and not a creepy sexploitation robot woman-child. Who, as Sky was saying, IS the Normandy.

Tricia Helfer's looks are exploited all over the place. I like that there is finally a role in which her *acting* has been spotlighted, and that alone. I want them to stick to their guns on that, not cave to the cheesy B-movie appeal of a sexbot.

HolyAvenger wrote...

I won't argue about the fact that
its fanservice-y...but have you played ME1/2 recently? Skintight
clothing, blue-skinned bisexual space babes, sexy badboy assassins.
Fanservice already abounds in the game to such an extent that I would
hardly call a sexy body for EDI over the top.

Yeah, the fact that fanservice abounds? Means that the two characters who are our only refuge from that rampant fanservice must remain a refuge.

Fin.

Bioware set up the idea that AI's could develop genuine emotion. Legion admired Shepard for some reason, and he explained the differences and similarities in how he thinks and how Humans do. Basically human braains work on chemicals and neural connections, AIs are just the computer equivalent of out Neural connections. This has been explained before in Mass Effect. If the AIs work the say you do, by working on simulated emotions and thoughts not of thier own then explain the Geth uprising. The Geth began to question why they had to work, why they were created, they attained a higher consciousness and with it the ability to think for themselves. To think for yourself means you develop some sense of self-worth and identity.

If one has self-worth, the ability to think for themselves, and a sense of identity they become something more than a computer and can develop emotion to further push themselves ( as a "living" being) . And as far as Edi being young that is not true. Legion once gave Shepard an example of The Geth Government saying they take every single geth's vote in a matter of seconds where it would take organics a long time. The Salarians can take an emotional event and cope with it in a few hours. I'm saying that Edi's technical age is irrelevant (we see this with Shepard and Liara) Mentally she is quite mature and the fact that she's a computer means that she could develop this as fast as she did. 

Also you said earlier that you wouldn't mind watching Joker and his Human girlfriend making out but then you ended your argument with saying that you wwant him to remain a refuge away from fanservice. so I'm ignoring the last point you made because it contradicts itself. 

[Vanguardforwin]

also sexbot? Bioware doesn't develop things like that, all of their characters and relationships have some sort of depth.