771 réponses à ce sujet

[BaladasDemnevanni]

MACharlie1 wrote...


Because....they are ordinary people?

That about sums it up, though more in Ashley's case than Kaidan's. Ashley's problem, as I said on another page, is that she hasn't done anything. Her backstory is that she's a career soldier who was kept from any interesting military engagements. When you first meet her on Eden Prime? Yeah, that about sums up her active military history.
  
Kaidan's problem is that his backstory is in contradiction of his character. The point of a character having a backstory to explore is to allow us to see, in detail, how they come into their respective points of view:
 
Carth lost his wife in KotOR- he wants to kill Saul Karath out of revenge. Kreia was exiled by both the Jedi and the Sith for her beliefs- she's come to hate both groups. Kaidan was abused by a cruel Turian biotic...he sees past it and manages to realize that everyone regardless of race is flawed, which he explains in about two sentences. If his viewpoint of the world is going to contradict his experiences, I would like more insight as to why.

Though keep in mind my experience with Kaidan is limited to that of Male shepards.

You really can't expect the human crew members to have an exciting backstory like Wrex - who killed his father after attempting to unify his people.

I can and I do expect that. Being human is not enough to keep a character from being interesting. Tons of films, novels, and games take place in the modern day, yet people fall in love with these characters all the time. 

However, Ashley is the quintessential example of an ordinary human. Her experiences are that of any normal person living in a post-modern day Earth: She likes poetry, believes in God, and has a sister who beat up a would-be boyfriend. I wouldn't call it the most creative start to a character who exists in a foreign universe. Ashley consists of experiences I could get from almost any person walking down the street. Her lines are just as forgettable as well. All imo.

I could say that Liara's backstory isn't that interesting either: little girl with powerful mommy becomes a scientist. The only reason why Liara's story is interesting is because she's an Asari who has mind-sex with you. 

Except Liara's backstory isn't interesting. That's why I much prefer her ME2 incarnation/development; she's actually done things at this point and has some kind of goal to her character. Mind-sex didn't make Liara interesting. Neither did being an Asari.

If she were human - you'd say she was boring and lackluster. 

Kreia, Morrigan, Alistair, Carth, Bastila, Jack, Canderous, Miranda, Atton, Handmaiden, Jolee Bindo.

So, no. If she were human, nothing would change. Liara is boring as an Asari. Tali is boring as a talking Quarian codex. In general though, the ME1 cast blows, ignoring Wrex and (to a lesser extent) Garrus. Ashley just happens to be the worst case of it.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 31 mai 2012 - 12:50 .

[jdgjordan]

Because we have the right to hate who ever we want for no good reason and no i am not joking suck it up a deal with it.

[avenging_teabag]

I loved Ashley - in ME2 she was my favorite squadmate after Garrus. Her faults are refreshingly real and deep - call it racism, or xenophobia, but it's a genuine, honest to god flaw (not the same as, and i'm not pointing fingers there, "being too shy", or "not liking red tape") that the writers didn't shy away from, and in the end allowed her to overcome it in a more or less believable way. And even despite that flaw, she's still a good person and an exemplary soldier, and conversations with her were the most well-done and felt natural. The last two games have really done her character a disservice.

Also people calling her a jesus nut, or religious fundamentalist, or something to that effect, need to take a deep breath. She brings up god exactly once in the entire 1st game, so chill.

[Razhathael]

Ashley was right about one thing, which was saying every race is out for themselves. That wasn't racist, it was realism. It's not what makes me and some others consider her racist to some degree. But please, people, stop talking about that one quote like it would make her incredibly smart. She was still being quite childish about everything. No, she was not right about Cerberus though, unless you count "don't trust Cerberus", which is said to you throughout ME2 with various characters.

The alliance was written to be stupid in ME2 they "denied the threat" so it was clearly written that Cerberus -was- the only choice to save the universe. And Shepard uses their recources to defeat the collectors and foils the reapers' plan. If it was up to Ashley, they'd all be dead, or atleast have A LOT of dead humans, some sort of human reaper and collectors to fight alongside the reape forces.

So no, "Ashley was right" is a silly thing to say, since it implies Shepard believed in Cerberus. Ashley says Cerberus isn't to be trusted, so does Shepard and a lot of characters. Or that all species look out for themselves. And it's true, but there's no point in talking about it so highly either.

That's it. But that really isn't the only reason she is considered so racist/ignorant. Observe the post below:

Barquiel wrote...

"Jealous? Of you? You're not even our species!"
"You want to get involved with some alien? Go ahead."
"Make nice with the bug-eyed monsters."
"I can't tell the difference between aliens and animals."

I don't think you can hand wave all those lines with "trust issues".

She doesn't say...
"I'm no fan of the hierarchy" or "I'm no fan of the council species"
She says...
"I'm no fan of aliens."

That above is the reason I think Ashley is racist. To put it better, midly-racist. And I don't like midly racist, you can always lean on the "Ashley was right about that one thing " like it was the most important thing, but people think she's racist because of comments like the ones up there, her general attitude, and to confirm their suspiciouns they have the alien discussion with her. It's not that discussion that makes her racist to people, it's just icing on the cake.

Alas, I hate to admit there's a reason arguments like this never go anywhere, since no matter what, the fan of a character wouldn't accept such an insult to her character. In their eyes, she's being a strong character who's being a realist. In the other side she's being petty, stupid and slightly racist. I guess I can't say either side is right, since it goes nowhere each side. Maybe I'd do the same with a character I like? Who knows.

Also about Wrex and Javik. I'm not a krogan or a prothean, I am however a human, and I don't find anything understandable about her attitude. Maybe I'd see it differently if she was an alien, because as long as that race has had a completely different mindset. (krogan history is very different, and prothean even more so)

[DRTJR]

The problem with Ashley is that with the exception of the blue creator's pet got more interesting in 2 and 3. In ME1 Garrus is a less interesting Harry Calihan in Space, Tali is a walking Codex explaining the Geth and Quarians, Liara should get spaced, Kaiden Tries to be stoic, and Ashley is an Xenophobic Isonlationist. Garrus and Tali are saved by character development in ME2, while Liara should have still been spaced. Kaiden has a cooler temperament than Ashley's fiery temper.

[ghost9191]

if you pay attention to her back story then you would see why she acts the way she does, might not like it but it is understandable, i see her as human, you can look around today and see people like that, the way we are. if she was xenophobe then why not join cerberus or Terra firma or whatever? When you have the conversation towards the end of mass effect 1 she gets pissed about it, because she thinks its a noble goal but too bad most of their members are just racist. But as i was saying with what happened to her family it is understandable how she feels towards aliens, way she grew up. but my opinion

but as for wrex and javik, you can't really dislike ash for those reasons and like wrex because he is the same way, even worse. you can see that in the second one,anyways that would make you a hypocrite. Javik isnt really racist just believe the stronger should lead or whatever

Modifié par ghost9191, 31 mai 2012 - 01:31 .

[Samuel_Valkyrie]

Maybe this has been said before, but I'm not going to wade through 30 pages of posts, so here's my 2 cents:

Both Kaidan and Ashley are characters designed around a point-of-view. Each examplifies a perspective on human relations with aliens.

For Ashley, aliens have always been an obstacle, an enemy, something that clashes with her. But, most of her, and her family's encounters, have been on a distance. A soldier shoots first, and doesn't bother to get to know the enemy beyond a tactical level. There is no personal contact.

Kaidan, however, experienced aliens up-close-and-personal. His experience with aliens is that they are just as different, just as fallible as human beings. he got to know them on a personal level.

What I find interesting is that Tali is a racist as well, but, unlike Ashley, she is embraced by the fandom. Her racism follows from not a select group of individuals being of more worth than others, but from believing a select group of people have less worth than others, namely the Geth. More importantly, you, as Shepard, have an influence on her, and you can make her change her mind. I haven't played Ashley much, but I don't think you have the same option with her.

[ghost9191]

@Samuel_Valkyrie It doesnt seem like you make as much of a impact with ashley but you can kinda change her mind i guess by the end of mass effect 1, but it doesn't really seem to carry over. just minor dialogue changes i guess , like when you are romancing her she says she doesn't blame the council for calling us wreckless , shepard responds you would have a few months ago and she says i have had alot to think about since i came onboard. more to it but that is the gist

Modifié par ghost9191, 31 mai 2012 - 01:58 .

[IElitePredatorI]

I wouldn't know, my Ashley is dead on Virmire... Wrex and Javik are rather funny to me and I do not mind them.

[terdferguson123]

Tom Lehrer wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

Not sure what the point of this post is. But how am I wrong in what I said? The Universe and the way it works has no room for an "intelligent creator" when the majority of whats in the universe is so violent (supernovae, black holes absorbing entire solar systems, collisions and extinctions, galaxies merging together like the milky way and andromeda in the future will that will cause many solar systems to be launched into the middle of nowhere with no hope of survival, or the fact that the living beings on planets who are so "intelligently" made to gel with their surroundings can be killed by their light source, or go blind by looking at it etc.) Why would an intelligent creator create things like this? Do you see what I am getting at? Believing in an intelligent creator, like Ashley does, is not realistic.

If your going to try to make me look stupid with one sentence, maybe you should post some reasons why I am wrong.

I guess if you want to look at things in such simple ways you might be right but consider the deeper effects of some of these things. Supernove create many of the heavy elements needed for biochemistry and blackholes hold galaxies together. Galatic mergings fling systems around but how would that affect their survival? Stars dont need other stars around to burn.

Im afraid I dont undersand your sun light argument though. When was the last time someone was killed by sun light? If your talking about skin cancer I guess I can see a small point here but our unnaturaly long life spans thanks to modren medicine are more to blame.

Yet, Supernovae still means the death of a solar system, even if it breathes life to another. If the creator was "intelligent" it wouldn't happen this way. You completely ignored my comment about cosmic collisions and black holes, because there really is no way to see any thing "good" about them. Galactic Mergings do cause the death of certain systems. Not all, but some will be flung into an unlivable zone in the galaxy. It seems to me, it's you who is ignoring the chaos that the universe brings in order to only see the good. It's a similar argument that people use when a shooting occurs and 10 people die, but that one survives. Everyone says "Thank god that one survived!" All the while ignoring that 10 others died. I don't care how you slice it, there is no possible way that intelligent design is plausible. And because of that, If Ashley believes that, she is not a realist.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 31 mai 2012 - 03:54 .

[av196vad]

Wrex: funny
Javik : funny

Therefore I like Javik & Wrex.

Ashley: dull as a rock

[Shepardtheshepard]

terdferguson123 wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

Not sure what the point of this post is. But how am I wrong in what I said? The Universe and the way it works has no room for an "intelligent creator" when the majority of whats in the universe is so violent (supernovae, black holes absorbing entire solar systems, collisions and extinctions, galaxies merging together like the milky way and andromeda in the future will that will cause many solar systems to be launched into the middle of nowhere with no hope of survival, or the fact that the living beings on planets who are so "intelligently" made to gel with their surroundings can be killed by their light source, or go blind by looking at it etc.) Why would an intelligent creator create things like this? Do you see what I am getting at? Believing in an intelligent creator, like Ashley does, is not realistic.

If your going to try to make me look stupid with one sentence, maybe you should post some reasons why I am wrong.

I guess if you want to look at things in such simple ways you might be right but consider the deeper effects of some of these things. Supernove create many of the heavy elements needed for biochemistry and blackholes hold galaxies together. Galatic mergings fling systems around but how would that affect their survival? Stars dont need other stars around to burn.

Im afraid I dont undersand your sun light argument though. When was the last time someone was killed by sun light? If your talking about skin cancer I guess I can see a small point here but our unnaturaly long life spans thanks to modren medicine are more to blame.

Yet, Supernovas still means the death of a solar system, even if it breathes life to another. If the creator was "intelligent" it wouldn't happen this way. You completely ignored my comment about cosmic collisions and black holes, because there really is no way to see any thing "good" about them. Galactic Mergings do cause the death of certain systems. Not all, but some will be flung into an unlivable zone in the galaxy. It seems to me, it's you who is ignoring the chaos that the universe brings in order to only see the good. It's a similar argument that people use when a shooting occurs and 10 people die, but that one survives. Everyone says "Thank god that one survived!" All the while ignoring that 10 others died. I don't care how you slice it, there is no possible way that intelligent design is plausible. And because of that, If Ashley believes that, she is not a realist.

You not liking how things turn out doesn't equal stupid. Atom bombs do horrible things, but you need to be smart to make them.
How many religions of the past (and especially in fantasy books/films/games) have God's of Chaos? Lots that's what. Not to mention as "God/s" tend to do that immortal/knowing all type stuff. Did you ever consider it's a needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few thing? Or something that at the end of everything could very well turn out  was the right thing to happen even by your personal morals?
Not to mention that physics makes sense. It's just a LOT of different rules to work out. A star won't suddenly explode if I threw my wee at it for example. There are hundreds.....nay thousands of factors that come into play.


Your issue sir/madam is if the God/s people believe in is a kind, loving one or not. Which is more than fair enough.
What your issue isn't is whether or not someone's God/s is smart. Saying there's not intelligence in how a "God/s" could of made the universe, is the same as saying there's no intelligence in the universe. Which spits on every scientific advance humanity has made, regardless of if they had a faith or not.

Modifié par Shepardtheshepard, 31 mai 2012 - 05:08 .

[terdferguson123]

Shepardtheshepard wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

Tom Lehrer wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...

Not sure what the point of this post is. But how am I wrong in what I said? The Universe and the way it works has no room for an "intelligent creator" when the majority of whats in the universe is so violent (supernovae, black holes absorbing entire solar systems, collisions and extinctions, galaxies merging together like the milky way and andromeda in the future will that will cause many solar systems to be launched into the middle of nowhere with no hope of survival, or the fact that the living beings on planets who are so "intelligently" made to gel with their surroundings can be killed by their light source, or go blind by looking at it etc.) Why would an intelligent creator create things like this? Do you see what I am getting at? Believing in an intelligent creator, like Ashley does, is not realistic.

If your going to try to make me look stupid with one sentence, maybe you should post some reasons why I am wrong.

I guess if you want to look at things in such simple ways you might be right but consider the deeper effects of some of these things. Supernove create many of the heavy elements needed for biochemistry and blackholes hold galaxies together. Galatic mergings fling systems around but how would that affect their survival? Stars dont need other stars around to burn.

Im afraid I dont undersand your sun light argument though. When was the last time someone was killed by sun light? If your talking about skin cancer I guess I can see a small point here but our unnaturaly long life spans thanks to modren medicine are more to blame.

Yet, Supernovas still means the death of a solar system, even if it breathes life to another. If the creator was "intelligent" it wouldn't happen this way. You completely ignored my comment about cosmic collisions and black holes, because there really is no way to see any thing "good" about them. Galactic Mergings do cause the death of certain systems. Not all, but some will be flung into an unlivable zone in the galaxy. It seems to me, it's you who is ignoring the chaos that the universe brings in order to only see the good. It's a similar argument that people use when a shooting occurs and 10 people die, but that one survives. Everyone says "Thank god that one survived!" All the while ignoring that 10 others died. I don't care how you slice it, there is no possible way that intelligent design is plausible. And because of that, If Ashley believes that, she is not a realist.

You not liking how things turn out doesn't equal stupid. Atom bombs do horrible things, but you need to be smart to make them.
How many religions of the past (and especially in fantasy books/films/games) have God's of Chaos? Lots that's what. Not to mention as "God/s" tend to do that immortal/knowing all type stuff. Did you ever consider it's a needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few thing? Or something that at the end of everything could very well turn out  was the right thing to happen even by your personal morals?
Not to mention that physics makes sense. It's just a LOT of different rules to work out. A star won't suddenly explode if I threw my wee at it for example. There are hundreds.....nay thousands of factors that come into play.


Your issue sir/madam is if the God/s people believe in is a kind, loving one or not. Which is more than fair enough.
What your issue isn't is whether or not someone's God/s is smart. Saying there's not intelligence in how a "God/s" could of made the universe, is the same as saying there's no intelligence in the universe. Which spits on every scientific advance humanity has made, regardless of if they had a faith or not.

I understand what your saying, however you misunderstand what I meant by trying to explain intelligence from a different perspective: We cannot compare what intelligence means to a human to what it would mean to a godlike figure. An Atom bomb was made using human intelligence, however a human cannot create a universe. So, with that said, intelligence means something completely different. When we say intelligent design, we are saying that god created everything with some kind of perfect purpose. Which is just simply not true.

I am not saying that the foundations of the universe don't work, they do, and we find out more and more about it every day through science. I am saying that if a god who could do anything was at work and had a perfect purpose for everything he created, like the one told of in all the abrahmic religions, he would have done many things differently. Because most things in the Universe are random, especially once we start analyzing ourselves and our own bodies. Watch this video from a brilliant man named Neil Degrasse Tyson, it's a presentation on why intelligent design really doesn't hold any weight, it will open your eyes to the many flaws in the human body, and how it interacts with the universe and why the two really don't work together well.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 31 mai 2012 - 05:25 .

[Lyrebon]

Versidious wrote...

Yakko77 wrote...

People need to listen to the game dialogue. She was never racist, not even a little bit. She has trust issues with aliens but she does not and has NEVAH hated aliens. Sheesh....

And, because noone else seems to remember/notice this, SHE WAS RIGHT. The other Council races *did* leave humanity to the Reapers, even the Salarians, who didn't have to deal with the Reapers until halfway through the game.

Considering that their own homeworlds were under attack it's a bit selfish to think they abandoned Earth. They weren't just sitting around watching the battle on Earth thinking, "silly humans, why should we help?" No, they were watching millions of their own kind die while they struggled for survival.

Palaven was under the same pressures as Earth, Thessia was obliterated, the quarians were fighting their own war against the geth, the krogan were on the brink of civil war and the salarians... well they were just being salarians.

The only race that didn't choose to help were the salarians while every other race was battling extinction. This scenario didn't prove Ashley was right (except about the salarians but one race does not constitute a whole). It couldn't prove she was right because to protect Earth from the onset each alien race would have had to abandon their own worlds to the invading Reapers.

It's saying to the turians, "forget Palaven and the billions of innocents on it, come save Earth. Earth is more important because we said so."

And if you're saying the Council abandoned the human colonies being abducted in ME2 then you can say the same for the Alliance Council if you let the original Council perish in ME1. Humans and aliens abandoned those colonies either way. It's just politics; bulls*** politics that puts statistics and lies above lives.

If anything Ashley proves only that politicians of all races have their head up their ass and that she is unwilling to acknowledge this egregious fallacy of her own kind. She can't accept that the Alliance turned its back on Shepard and ignores the real threat until the Reapers come knocking at their door - she's a "soldier of the Alliance" therefore they can never be wrong about anything, they don't lie, they're the ALLIANCE. She's ignorant and self-absorbed, and she is elitist with a superior complex about humanity.

And those kind of people I can't stand.

Modifié par Lyrebon, 31 mai 2012 - 06:07 .

[Clayless]

Actions speak louder than words. Wrex resented the other races for effectively culling his entire species, an event that (most likely) happened in his lifetime. I would be pretty pissed off if aliens arrived, asked for our help, we complied and saved the galaxy, and then the aliens decided to forcibly cause more stillborns and miscarraiges in the entire human race because of some "what if" future event. But still, regardless of that, Wrex doesn't want revenge or war. He's slightly racist yeah, but with good reason, and his actions he wants to take in the future speak far louder than a sarcastic joke.

Javik pretty much says the hard truth of the matter, as much as you disagree with what he says or the way he goes about it you know that he's technically right.

Ashley on the other hand is just a **** about it, and is a unfunny **** in general.

[LeicsFox]

 There is nothing wrong with putting humanity first, you must remember the first Alien race encountered by humanity in the game dedcided to attack. Outright Racism is wrong, but trying to protect your own species by being cautious towards others doesn't seem wrong to me, and that's why I like ashley.

Modifié par johncm, 31 mai 2012 - 06:06 .

[Lyrebon]

ghost9191 wrote...

if you pay attention to her back story then you would see why she acts the way she does, might not like it but it is understandable, i see her as human, you can look around today and see people like that, the way we are. if she was xenophobe then why not join cerberus or Terra firma or whatever? When you have the conversation towards the end of mass effect 1 she gets pissed about it, because she thinks its a noble goal but too bad most of their members are just racist. But as i was saying with what happened to her family it is understandable how she feels towards aliens, way she grew up. but my opinion

but as for wrex and javik, you can't really dislike ash for those reasons and like wrex because he is the same way, even worse. you can see that in the second one,anyways that would make you a hypocrite. Javik isnt really racist just believe the stronger should lead or whatever

And there's also people like her that have proved different. Shepard gave her the chance she'd always been requesting: shipboard service. And how does she thank that opportunity? Oh yeah, insubordination, rudeness, snapping at everyone because they don't agree with her. In all fairness Ashley is not a balanced individual, she has deep anger issues and is very impulsive.

She only has herself to blame for not making officer and quite frankly I wouldn't have promoted her in ME3 or made her a Spectre either. If she was leading other soldiers she'd more than likely get them killed because of her brash personality. She's unable to analyse a situation because she allows her own prejudices to cloud her judgement.

In short, she's bad leadership material and very nearly psychotic.

[Shepardtheshepard]

terdferguson123 wrote...
I understand what your saying, however you misunderstand what I meant by trying to explain intelligence from a different perspective: We cannot compare what intelligence means to a human to what it would mean to a godlike figure. An Atom bomb was made using human intelligence, however a human cannot create a universe. So, with that said, intelligence means something completely different. When we say intelligent design, we are saying that god created everything with some kind of perfect purpose. Which is just simply not true.

So you're saying we can't compare human intelligence to a godlike one, then state that a godlike figure can't of created everything to a perfect purpose? Who's purpose? Ours, or the one you say we wouldn't have a chance of understanding?

How do we define "perfect" though as it is? Think of how many disagree on what the "perfect" job is and whathave you.
Don't alot of sci-fi series at some point have the story that end with someone saying, without our "flaws" we're not perfect? That flaws of all sorts help us grow and lead to a greater understanding of ourselves and the universe around us.
Or even Mordin's speech come to think about it. It's with our limitations that we achieve greatness.

Also, from my small knowledge of religion, I don't seem to recall any of them saying it's a "perfect purpose"
for humanity. In fact I'm pretty sure (sorry people if I'm wrong here) for Jews and Christians, all they're told is "I'm God. I'm perfect and have a perfect plan. But for you guys, life's still gonna pretty much mostly suck. So try not to make it worse by being mean to each other and I'll get you some ice cream when this is all over."

 Something not making sense to humans doesn't mean it 's simply not true, and often means we only currently don't understand.
Like gravity. Both the strongest and weakest of the forces. That's mind-boggling, certainly not stupid though. All it means is that humans still have a long way to go in working things out, and should, having only been around for an extremely short period.

May I add, yes, humans can't create the universe......yet.   

terdferguson123 wrote...
I am not saying that the foundations of the universe don't work, they do, and we find out more and more about it every day through science. I am saying that if a god who could do anything was at work and had a perfect purpose for everything he created, like the one told of in all the abrahmic religions, he would have done many things differently. Because most things in the Universe are random, especially once we start analyzing ourselves and our own bodies. Watch this video from a brilliant man named Neil Degrasse Tyson, it's a presentation on why intelligent design really doesn't hold any weight, it will open your eyes to the many flaws in the human body, and how it interacts with the universe and why the two really don't work together well.

There are NO random things in the universe. Everything works through physics. It can appear random, but it's still constricted to the laws of physics, even the ones we don't fully understand. Physics dictates that there's even a tiny chance Mandy Moore might appear next to me in the next 10 seconds wearing nothing but a fez. *Waits*  ......damn.
The problem is that humanity still (yet) isn't smart enough to know all these things. Remember (and by remember, I mean long before we were born) when people used die all the time randomly out of nowhere? Well nowadays we know it's not random it's because they've been eating/sexing/breathing in x/y/z and doing that quite logically means sudden symptomless death later on.
We can't apply the idea that God/s had no intellegent design just because we'd do things differently or don't like the way they're done. Nor can we say things could be a flaw within "God/s" plans. My willy may be small, but it effects phyics. And phyics covers everything and is lots and lots and lots of tiny things being connnected by working together to change the universe in massive ways. My tiny willy may seem like a flaw to you and the wife, however it's actually doing it's small part technically keeping this planet in orbit you know! 


I'd do things differently from you if we were both Gods. Your designs woudn't be any less intellgent than mine, just different. You make diet coke, I make diet pepsi. I make the butterscotch pond, you make the porno bush. 


I'm sorry, but that video did nothing for me. Neil's a very smart man (I enjoyed the other video of the event where he warns Darwkins to calm down), but this video comes off as "Waaa! Why don't we have this and this!?! Why can't I fly without wings? Why can't I breath through my bum?! Why should I waste time eating?! Why can't things be done the way I want where everything has a seeming positive result!?"


The argument is and always shall be "Is God/s nice?" Not "Did God/s have a smart plan?"

[Orumon]

Because it's pretty clear from the get go we're SUPPOSED to empathise with Ashley, which of course inclines us to find reasons to oppose this.

Wrex, by contrast, were people we're supposed to disagree with on the subject, and they had, unlike Ash, very good personal experience with why he hated those he hates.

Javik, by contrast, was just so unabashedly arrogant that you couldn't help but be impressed.

[Archontor]

Often Generals are highly paid, NCOs such as ash and her father aren't. The loss of money and standing must have been massive. Whilst that is sad it always made me wonder if she was angry a war with the Turians got her family blacklisted or just made them poor.

[keekee53]

I don't know but I laughed when the writers called Tali the racist....sooooo yeah maybe Ashley shouldn't be the character wearing the racist title...LOL

She is dead in most of my playthroughs but I liked her character.

[terdferguson123]

Shepardtheshepard wrote...

terdferguson123 wrote...
I understand what your saying, however you misunderstand what I meant by trying to explain intelligence from a different perspective: We cannot compare what intelligence means to a human to what it would mean to a godlike figure. An Atom bomb was made using human intelligence, however a human cannot create a universe. So, with that said, intelligence means something completely different. When we say intelligent design, we are saying that god created everything with some kind of perfect purpose. Which is just simply not true.

So you're saying we can't compare human intelligence to a godlike one, then state that a godlike figure can't of created everything to a perfect purpose? Who's purpose? Ours, or the one you say we wouldn't have a chance of understanding?

How do we define "perfect" though as it is? Think of how many disagree on what the "perfect" job is and whathave you.
Don't alot of sci-fi series at some point have the story that end with someone saying, without our "flaws" we're not perfect? That flaws of all sorts help us grow and lead to a greater understanding of ourselves and the universe around us.
Or even Mordin's speech come to think about it. It's with our limitations that we achieve greatness.

Also, from my small knowledge of religion, I don't seem to recall any of them saying it's a "perfect purpose"
for humanity. In fact I'm pretty sure (sorry people if I'm wrong here) for Jews and Christians, all they're told is "I'm God. I'm perfect and have a perfect plan. But for you guys, life's still gonna pretty much mostly suck. So try not to make it worse by being mean to each other and I'll get you some ice cream when this is all over."

 Something not making sense to humans doesn't mean it 's simply not true, and often means we only currently don't understand.
Like gravity. Both the strongest and weakest of the forces. That's mind-boggling, certainly not stupid though. All it means is that humans still have a long way to go in working things out, and should, having only been around for an extremely short period.

May I add, yes, humans can't create the universe......yet.   

terdferguson123 wrote...
I am not saying that the foundations of the universe don't work, they do, and we find out more and more about it every day through science. I am saying that if a god who could do anything was at work and had a perfect purpose for everything he created, like the one told of in all the abrahmic religions, he would have done many things differently. Because most things in the Universe are random, especially once we start analyzing ourselves and our own bodies. Watch this video from a brilliant man named Neil Degrasse Tyson, it's a presentation on why intelligent design really doesn't hold any weight, it will open your eyes to the many flaws in the human body, and how it interacts with the universe and why the two really don't work together well.

There are NO random things in the universe. Everything works through physics. It can appear random, but it's still constricted to the laws of physics, even the ones we don't fully understand. Physics dictates that there's even a tiny chance Mandy Moore might appear next to me in the next 10 seconds wearing nothing but a fez. *Waits*  ......damn.
The problem is that humanity still (yet) isn't smart enough to know all these things. Remember (and by remember, I mean long before we were born) when people used die all the time randomly out of nowhere? Well nowadays we know it's not random it's because they've been eating/sexing/breathing in x/y/z and doing that quite logically means sudden symptomless death later on.
We can't apply the idea that God/s had no intellegent design just because we'd do things differently or don't like the way they're done. Nor can we say things could be a flaw within "God/s" plans. My willy may be small, but it effects phyics. And phyics covers everything and is lots and lots and lots of tiny things being connnected by working together to change the universe in massive ways. My tiny willy may seem like a flaw to you and the wife, however it's actually doing it's small part technically keeping this planet in orbit you know! 


I'd do things differently from you if we were both Gods. Your designs woudn't be any less intellgent than mine, just different. You make diet coke, I make diet pepsi. I make the butterscotch pond, you make the porno bush. 


I'm sorry, but that video did nothing for me. Neil's a very smart man (I enjoyed the other video of the event where he warns Darwkins to calm down), but this video comes off as "Waaa! Why don't we have this and this!?! Why can't I fly without wings? Why can't I breath through my bum?! Why should I waste time eating?! Why can't things be done the way I want where everything has a seeming positive result!?"


The argument is and always shall be "Is God/s nice?" Not "Did God/s have a smart plan?"

Believe me, I understand what your saying, and I appreciate you taking the time to post it. I even agree with you to somewhat of an extent. But, I still stand by the opinion that an intelligent god would not stoop to being cruel, because cruelty is a sign of lack of intelligence. And let's face it, some things in the universe and planets is cruel. We can argue to death all day long the "we don't understand the way god works!" argument, but I'd rather just save us both time and stop using arguments that have no answer. I don't like attempting to validate an opinion about a supreme being being cruel because "we don't understand him", I think it sounds like an excuse. To each his hown I guess.

[DPSSOC]

Lyrebon wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

if you pay attention to her back story then you would see why she acts the way she does, might not like it but it is understandable, i see her as human, you can look around today and see people like that, the way we are. if she was xenophobe then why not join cerberus or Terra firma or whatever? When you have the conversation towards the end of mass effect 1 she gets pissed about it, because she thinks its a noble goal but too bad most of their members are just racist. But as i was saying with what happened to her family it is understandable how she feels towards aliens, way she grew up. but my opinion

but as for wrex and javik, you can't really dislike ash for those reasons and like wrex because he is the same way, even worse. you can see that in the second one,anyways that would make you a hypocrite. Javik isnt really racist just believe the stronger should lead or whatever

And there's also people like her that have proved different. Shepard gave her the chance she'd always been requesting: shipboard service. And how does she thank that opportunity? Oh yeah, insubordination, rudeness, snapping at everyone because they don't agree with her. In all fairness Ashley is not a balanced individual, she has deep anger issues and is very impulsive.

When was she insubordinate, rude, or snappy?  Only instance I can think of is the latter when the non-Alliance personnel attempt to dictate the mission (in debriefings).  She's perhaps overly defensive of Shepard's position of authority, taking suggestions for actions as mandates, but the aliens have been running rough shod over humanity since they arrived so it's not an entirely baseless assessment.

Lyrebon wrote...
In short, she's bad leadership material and very nearly psychotic.

Umm no.  Psychopathy is a specific mental condition with a definitive meaning.  Ashley demonstrates almost none of the characteristics associated with psychopathy nor does she exhibit those which she does possess to any excessive degree.  I'll agree she doesn't come across as great leadership material but then neither do Garrus or Tali and look where it got them.  And people wonder why the galaxy's such a mess.

Edit: Missed this one

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Actions speak louder than words. Wrex resented the other races for effectively culling his entire species, an event that (most likely) happened in his lifetime. I would be pretty pissed off if aliens arrived, asked for our help, we complied and saved the galaxy, and then the aliens decided to forcibly cause more stillborns and miscarraiges in the entire human race because of some "what if" future event. But still, regardless of that, Wrex doesn't want revenge or war. He's slightly racist yeah, but with good reason, and his actions he wants to take in the future speak far louder than a sarcastic joke.

Javik pretty much says the hard truth of the matter, as much as you disagree with what he says or the way he goes about it you know that he's technically right.

First point Ash has good reasons for her views as well, she believes the aliens will throw us to the wolves to save their own backsides cause they've done it, and are rather proud of it, 3 times in their history to other races; what makes us special?  As for actions speaking louder than words, keep in mind that when the chips are down she risks her life to protect the Council, to the point of placing herself between them and quite possibly the deadliest SOB in the galaxy.

Second point so's Ash. People have brought up ME3 proving Ash right but she's proven right in ME1 and 2 as well. In both games when you go to the Council asking for help you're told, "Not our problem," and then proceed to do nothing.  Not just not taking action but literally doing nothing; no humanitarian aid, no intel, nothing; hell they actively work against you for part of the 1st game.  Why, because it's not their people being gunned down by Saren and his Geth, it's not their colonies being razed, and it's not their people vanishing in the hundreds of thousands. Just like the Krogan Rebellions weren't their problem, until the Krogan attacked an Asari world.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 01 juin 2012 - 05:15 .

[GhostWolf]

"Xenophobe" or "racist": Bioware used "racist," so I will stick with that for my answer. Ashley is racist with, so far as I can see, no redeeming qualities.

Wrex *may* be racist but what happened to the Krogan, the genophage, is still happening. It is not a thing that happened hundreds of years ago and is now over. Even so, Wrex is willing to see others for who they are and trust them based on their individual traits, not on cultural stereotypes. His trust of Shepard and Mordin, and his willingness to acknowledge Turian efforts to right a wrong (begrudging as his acknowledgement is) serve as proof.

Javik is racist in the beginning because of his culture. But even he sees people for their individual traits and makes an effort to break the shackles of his cultural biases (his conscious effort to use "Dr. T'Soni" rather than "the Asari") by the end of ME3.

Ashley sees aliens as "bug-eyed monsters" based on cultural and family prejudices and never demonstrates any effort to question or break free from those biases. I am playing ME1 again and thought I would retry an Ashley romance to carry it into ME3, but I can't force myself to even for the sake of the game-play. Ashley's character is, to me, just too repulsive.

[TheClonesLegacy]

They Have Dry senses of Humor,
It's a common trait,
Ash just has issues She needs to work out.
oh and the guy above mes point is good too

Modifié par TheClonesLegacy, 01 juin 2012 - 11:32 .