285 réponses à ce sujet

[What a Succulent Ass]

v TricKy v wrote...

Every time I post in the same thread as you, Run DMC plays in my head.

YOU ARE SPOILING MY POSTING EXPERIENCE.

[AtreiyaN7]

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

[v TricKy v]

Random Jerkface wrote...

v TricKy v wrote...

Every time I post in the same thread as you, Run DMC plays in my head.

YOU ARE SPOILING MY POSTING EXPERIENCE.

You would be surprised at how many people suddenly start singing the song from Run DMC if they see my name in a multiplayer game. It´s crazy 

[Funkdrspot]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

nothing i said was rosy, youre simply cherrypicking a clip and taking it out of context. actually a dictator isnt much of a dictator if he's acting like a democratically elected president and is putting fair rules and free speech in place

I don't think you know what "cherry picking" means--I asked you a question because what you answer determines how I address your qualification. If you truly believe the power of a Pure Heart™ will keep people from committing acts of evil, then what you wrote is not only rosy, but empirically incorrect.

That being said, again, a dictator is still a dictator. It does not matter how s/he acts. Unless the AI never intervenes in galactic society in any way, shape, form or fashion, it is removing agency and the power of self-determination. Even if it acts in what it believes is in the best interest for everyone, it is still, by nature, a bad thing. And benevolent "wisdom" is what began the mess with the original Catalyst in the first place.

lol, i dont know what cherrypicking is?! so its not sniping 1 part of 1 sentence out of a paragraph in an effort to remove it from the context it was used in?!? thats exactly what cherry picking is. you should go back, read my post in its ENTIRETY and then form an opinion. youll find were arguing 2 sides of the same coin. you think power corrupts, i think the human mind is already corrupt but that power removes the restraints that culture and society place on it.

[Chaotic-Fusion]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

I believe his point was that it doesn't make sense to gamble with control or synthesis because one person might die, not to denigrate EDI's vale as a life-form or person. Personally I find the Geth death much more tragic than EDI, though I will still chose destroy, with the consequences, because it's what was agreed upon.

[D24O]

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

I believe his point was that it doesn't make sense to gamble with control or synthesis because one person might die, not to denigrate EDI's vale as a life-form or person. Personally I find the Geth death much more tragic than EDI, though I will still chose destroy, with the consequences, because it's what was agreed upon.

No, the OP was tryng to deligitimize her validity, and probably that of the geth.

[Fraevar]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

Tbh, regardless of the OP's thoughts, my main problem with it was the same as I had with the Catalyst segment - it was Mac Walters standing next to me with a neon sign and a baseball bat going: "HERE IS HOW YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO FEEL NOW!!!" whenever EDI had any dialogue. I liked the character but the fact that I felt like I was being hit over the head with her ended up causing the opposite effect - I disliked the character more and more because of the delivery. [resists making the rest of the case on how he feels this ties into the failure of the ending.

[ioannisdenton]

EDI was cool and great. claims about sexbot are kinda heperbolic.
She got a body , a sexy one since cerberus spy was actually hot looking.
But if i was to sacrifice anyone for destroynig the reapers i will. no remorse there

[EricChase88]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

You don't even look at what my real argument is. Why should people be bothered by her death to not choose Destroy? It's not about who she is, it's about one individual vs. an entire galaxy. Sacrifices must be made. Mordin dies, Legion dies, and even squadmates from Mass Effect 2. Why does EDI's death matter so much for some people to not chose Destroy? And frankly, she's really just a sexbot. What qualities does she have other than her a plaything for Joker in a horribly done romance? I'm sorry, but I'm honestly curious to know what people see in her character that's worth anything.

[What a Succulent Ass]

Funkdrspot wrote...

you should go back, read my post in its ENTIRETY and then form an opinion. youll find were arguing 2 sides of the same coin. you think power corrupts, i think the human mind is already corrupt but that power removes the restraints that culture and society place on it.

I read the entire post. It's not exactly a master thesis. I also didn't dissociate the line from its context; I addressed your premise and asked you a question that you still haven't answered.

And no, we're not making the same argument from different angles. You postulate that only people with a "propensity" for corruptness will be corrupted by absolute power, and moral individuals will remain unscathed. I postulate that dictatorships of all sorts are an inherently bad idea, as all people can be corrupted.

Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 août 2012 - 07:50 .

[Doofe2012]

Anyone who thinks EDI was just a sexbot clearly paid no attention during her interactions with Joker and Shepard during ME2 or ME3. She was a person. The only difference was that she was made of metal and not flesh, and had a computer in place of an organic brain. And Joker loved her. You could see this coming just before and right after the Suicide Mission in ME2.

[EricChase88]

D24O wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

I believe his point was that it doesn't make sense to gamble with control or synthesis because one person might die, not to denigrate EDI's vale as a life-form or person. Personally I find the Geth death much more tragic than EDI, though I will still chose destroy, with the consequences, because it's what was agreed upon.

No, the OP was tryng to deligitimize her validity, and probably that of the geth.

She is no more valid than any other character that can die. Why should she be special enough for people to soften up to the Reapers by choosing the other two endings?

Doofe2012 wrote...

Anyone who thinks EDI was just a sexbot clearly paid no attention during her interactions with Joker and Shepard during ME2 or ME3. She was a person. The only difference was that she was made of metal and not flesh, and had a computer in place of an organic brain. And Joker loved her. You could see this coming just before and right after the Suicide Mission in ME2.

Guess what, a mass murderer is a person. Does that matter? She may be a person, but she is a person that's bland and has no interesting qualities other than that horrible Joker romance and terribly overdone Pinnochio or Data story.

Modifié par EricChase88, 04 août 2012 - 08:13 .

[EricChase88]

double post.

Modifié par EricChase88, 04 août 2012 - 07:52 .

[Funkdrspot]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

I think it's becoming quite clear to everyone involved that you have a very simplistic understanding of human nature.

you should stop your appeal to the majority.

[D24O]

EricChase88 wrote...

She is no more valid than any other character that can die. Why should she be special enough for people to soften up to the Reapers by choosing the other two endings?

There's also the Geth. The question one has to ask themselves at the end is whether they're willing to sacrafice an entire people for something that will work, when there are other potential solutions. Its a personal question, but one that should be answered taking into accountt that synthetics have as muchright to exist as organics.

[What a Succulent Ass]

Funkdrspot wrote...

you should stop your appeal to the majority.

Dogg, if you're going to pretend you are familiar with logical fallacies, at least use them in the proper context.

Modifié par Random Jerkface, 04 août 2012 - 07:58 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

EricChase88 wrote...

D24O wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

I believe his point was that it doesn't make sense to gamble with control or synthesis because one person might die, not to denigrate EDI's vale as a life-form or person. Personally I find the Geth death much more tragic than EDI, though I will still chose destroy, with the consequences, because it's what was agreed upon.

No, the OP was tryng to deligitimize her validity, and probably that of the geth.

She is no more valid than any other character that can die. Why should she be special enough for people to soften up to the Reapers by choosing the other two endings?

Doofe2012 wrote...

Anyone who thinks EDI was just a sexbot clearly paid no attention during her interactions with Joker and Shepard during ME2 or ME3. She was a person. The only difference was that she was made of metal and not flesh, and had a computer in place of an organic brain. And Joker loved her. You could see this coming just before and right after the Suicide Mission in ME2.

Guess what, a mass murderer is a person. Does that matter? She may be a person, but she is a person that's bland and has no interesting qualities other than that horrible Joker romance and terribly overdone Pinnochio or Data story. 

That's just, you know, your opinion? Oh, and did I mention that the most Joker gets from EDI is a good-luck kiss before the assault on Earth, and only if you encourage their relationship? That's not to say that criticisms of her oversexualized body isn't fair; I mean, did she really need porn star boobs? However, writing off EDI as just a sexbot has about as much merit as saying that Miranda's body is just a fanservice, Liara's body is just a fanservice, Thane's body is just a fanservice, and so on so forth. Gotta love the go-to BSN argumentative technique of using double standards. <_<

I'm really tempted to create a new thread just to show how retarded the sexbot argument is.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 05 août 2012 - 09:07 .

[Funkdrspot]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

you should go back, read my post in its ENTIRETY and then form an opinion. youll find were arguing 2 sides of the same coin. you think power corrupts, i think the human mind is already corrupt but that power removes the restraints that culture and society place on it.

I read the entire post. It's not exactly a master thesis. I also didn't dissociate the line from its context; I addressed your premise and asked you a question that you still haven't answered.

And no, we're not making the same argument from different angles. You postulate that only people with a "propensity" for corruptness will be corrupted by absolute power, and moral individuals will remain unscathed. I postulate that dictatorships of all sorts are an inherently bad idea, as all people can be corrupted.

my point is a bit more complex than you seem to be reading. you seem to be constantly trying to simplify my point to black and white when its various shades of grey. 

[Funkdrspot]

Random Jerkface wrote...

Funkdrspot wrote...

you should stop your appeal to the majority.

Dogg, if you're going to pretend you are familiar with logical fallacies, at least use them in the proper context.

i do. Thanks.

[AtreiyaN7]

EricChase88 wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

You don't even look at what my real argument is. Why should people be bothered by her death to not choose Destroy? It's not about who she is, it's about one individual vs. an entire galaxy. Sacrifices must be made. Mordin dies, Legion dies, and even squadmates from Mass Effect 2. Why does EDI's death matter so much for some people to not chose Destroy? And frankly, she's really just a sexbot. What qualities does she have other than her a plaything for Joker in a horribly done romance? I'm sorry, but I'm honestly curious to know what people see in her character that's worth anything.

You didn't have an argument in your original post - you only asked why would anyone care about it when she's just a sexbot, and you seem to harp on it constantly through the thread  to the point of ignoring what anyone says about EDI and the issues of synthetic life, friendship, and everything else. 

My point there is that there are those people who care about her because she's a person - a complex, growing person. She's saved the Normandy on many an occasion since ME2, and she has also displayed loyalty to the crew and to Shepard AND to all the organic races. The revelation that she was formerly the rogue Luna VI also shows how much she's changed over time.

Some of us consider her a friend. And some people probably feel strongly enough about it that they feel that EDI and the geth can be our friends/peers and don't want to needlessly kill them when they're sentient and capable of displaying more humanity than some human beings ever manage to show to each other.

In a question of sacrifice vs. the fate of the galaxy, if you value all intelligent life and consider EDI a friend and a person, then she has as much of a right to life as anyone else. EDI and the geth count as much as quarians do or humans do or asari do, etc. It's not easy to throw away the lives of millions of people.

You trying to insist that EDI is worthless because of your image of her and basically implying that it should be easy  to choose to sacrifice all synthetics because you don't like/approve of her appearance doesn't make me take you or your question particularly seriously. Some people just view her differently than you do because of their experiences through the game - if you don't get that now, you never will.

[EricChase88]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

EricChase88 wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Dear OP, you're being an insensitive lummox. EDI was/is a person - a highly intelligent and complex one who was becoming more human than some actual human beings. Certainly more so than, say, you. Because, unlike you, EDI cared deeply about other people and saw the importance and value of each individual. She found meaning in our emotions, our ability to sacrifice, our empathy and caring, and our willingness to fight for others. She didn't go around judging people because of their bodies. Either you're a troll, or you're really a complete...

Best to end that right there before I say something that might get me a 24-hour ban..

You don't even look at what my real argument is. Why should people be bothered by her death to not choose Destroy? It's not about who she is, it's about one individual vs. an entire galaxy. Sacrifices must be made. Mordin dies, Legion dies, and even squadmates from Mass Effect 2. Why does EDI's death matter so much for some people to not chose Destroy? And frankly, she's really just a sexbot. What qualities does she have other than her a plaything for Joker in a horribly done romance? I'm sorry, but I'm honestly curious to know what people see in her character that's worth anything.

You didn't have an argument in your original post - you only asked why would anyone care about it when she's just a sexbot, and you seem to harp on it constantly through the thread  to the point of ignoring what anyone says about EDI and the issues of synthetic life, friendship, and everything else. 

My point there is that there are those people who care about her because she's a person - a complex, growing person. She's saved the Normandy on many an occasion since ME2, and she has also displayed loyalty to the crew and to Shepard AND to all the organic races. The revelation that she was formerly the rogue Luna VI also shows how much she's changed over time.

Some of us consider her a friend. And some people probably feel strongly enough about it that they feel that EDI and the geth can be our friends/peers and don't want to needlessly kill them when they're sentient and capable of displaying more humanity than some human beings ever manage to show to each other.

In a question of sacrifice vs. the fate of the galaxy, if you value all intelligent life and consider EDI a friend and a person, then she has as much of a right to life as anyone else. EDI and the geth count as much as quarians do or humans do or asari do, etc. It's not easy to throw away the lives of millions of people.

You trying to insist that EDI is worthless because of your image of her and basically implying that it should be easy  to choose to sacrifice all synthetics because you don't like/approve of her appearance doesn't make me take you or your question particularly seriously. Some people just view her differently than you do because of their experiences through the game - if you don't get that now, you never will.

EDI is worth one individual. Just one. The Geth is worth one race. Just one. You can't see the tradeoff? The fact is I can't see the reason people will value one character, a really bland one, enough to let the Reapers live. And please tell me some interesting qualities about EDI. She may be a person, but guess what, so is a burglar or murderer. What merits does she even have to make people like her? Compared to people like Garrus, Thane, and Mordin, what interesting qualities does she even have?

Modifié par EricChase88, 04 août 2012 - 08:36 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Delerius_Jedi wrote...

Tbh, regardless of the OP's thoughts, my main problem with it was the same as I had with the Catalyst segment - it was Mac Walters standing next to me with a neon sign and a baseball bat going: "HERE IS HOW YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO FEEL NOW!!!" whenever EDI had any dialogue. I liked the character but the fact that I felt like I was being hit over the head with her ended up causing the opposite effect - I disliked the character more and more because of the delivery. [resists making the rest of the case on how he feels this ties into the failure of the ending.

In any story the writer's goal is to manipulate your emotions - when it's too obvious, it can be an issue of course, but I think your feelings about the Catalyst and how that was handled might be feeding into the EDI situation. *shrug* Given some gamers seem to need handholding, I'm not surprised by a certain amount of hamhandedness. However, I was already fond of EDI and Joker as people, so I thought it was a natural progression. I think that a Pinocchio/Galatea situation is always going to be pretty obvious. Whether or not you can subtly pull off the transformation into a real person in a short time when you've got twenty million things going on is another matter.

[Solaxe]

"Why do people even care about EDI's death?"

Because they like her?

What a dumb thread

[Solotalento]

I grew to like robots watching futurama and before that the transformers