268 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

I'll probably write a longer version of this sooner or later, but I don't feel much like writing an essay right now.

Anyway, EDI's character arc was one of my favorite parts of not only ME 3, but the series in general. In fact, I think I would consider EDI my favorite character aside from Liara, Garrus, and Tali.

BUt EDI's body has gotten a lot of flak on the BSN. The main complant that seems to be implied is that basically, EDI was 'sexualized' to draw in the nerdy teenage boy and basement dweller crowd because they love sexy robots.

Frankly, I think that is ridiculous, based on the way EDI is handled in the game. Whenever romance or sex comes up with EDI, it's clearly written to be endearing and humerous, not sexually enticing. If the point was really to draw in players with sex, I think it's pretty obvious that EDI would have been made a love interest and been present in ME 3's advertising.

Modifié par David7204, 24 octobre 2012 - 05:25 .

[xMellowhype]

Every form of media does this, don't know why BioWare should get flak. It's the nature of the beast. I mean consider the demographics.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

******.

[rekn2]

the majority of the fanbase are liberals and shes "overly sexualized" is my guess

[Biotic Sage]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

******.

LOL

But seriously EDI's body was a misstep in my opinion.  The thing with her and Joker was extremely cheesey, I feel like it was built off fan fiction.  They did have good chemistry in ME2 and that's why the fan fiction existed in the first place, but I feel like these things are better left the way they are.  Yes, Joker and EDI have a connection.  No, it doesn't have to be sexual / classicaly romantic.

Also, I don't like the fact that they have to anthrapomorphize and "humanize" AI in order for it to be deserving of life and happiness.  The hypothetically interesting thing about AI to me is that this is a self-aware sentient being that operates on a potentially completely different framework than humans.  Its idea of "happiness" and our idea of "happiness" could be completely different, but we could both respect each other as fellow lifeforms.  EDI doesn't need to learn "love" or "sex" in order to be a complete being.  That's just humans shoehorning meaningful existence into our own terms.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 24 octobre 2012 - 05:25 .

[spirosz]

She was sexualized, as Ashley was (she developed the same ass as Miranda over a 2 year span, damn future, you scary), though I do love both, you can't argue that she wasn't, since you can say the same for Miranda and Samara for ME2 - if you want to add Jack sure, but I've seen a lot of posts that she turns off a lot of dudes, whatever floats their boat. The thing is, you have to look past that, which is the point I guess, don't judge a book by it's cover.

[Isichar]

xMellowhype wrote...

Every form of media does this, don't know why BioWare should get flak. It's the nature of the beast. I mean consider the demographics.

It was kind of tasteless and a bit more over the top then I think it had to be but thats just my opinion.

[Biotic Sage]

rekn2 wrote...

the majority of the fanbase are liberals and shes "overly sexualized" is my guess

I am quite liberal and I have no problem with Miranda's ass or Asari hottness.  A lot of people just don't like "over sexualization," or for that matter "sexualization in general," where it doesn't belong.

[MyChemicalBromance]

David7204 wrote...
EDI's body has gotten a lot of flak here. The main complant that seems to be implied is that basically, EDI was 'sexualized' a body to draw in the nerdy teenage boy and basement dweller crowd because they love sexy robots.

You could make this argument for every female character in a video game ever. People who make this argument are simply playing into stereotypes about gamers, men, and women for that matter.

Truth is, if sexuality bothers you, that's your issue. You wouldn't (at least I hope not) tell a woman that her appearance is misogynistic, so why are you saying that about EDI? Because she's created?

Here we go again...

Somehow, because EDI's body was designed by a person (in-game and in real life), it's insulting, whereas if it "just happened" then it would be okay. It's the same thing with Miranda, her body was designed in-game and out, and people have a problem with it. Call IT meta all you want; the creator created conflict engages us in more areas and on more levels than you'd think.

People will also say that EDI "didn't need" a sexy body, that we already appreciated her as a disembodied voice. Think about that one for a minute. It's just as misogynistic as what they claim to be against.

Truth is, it was put there to provoke you. It was put there to make you think about what sex really is, what thoughts really are. However, much like other "challenging" parts of the game, "fans" spit in it's face when it didn't conform to their ideals.

In short, saying that EDI's body is "wrong" is wrong. You're saying you know what's best for her body; not her. Then again, there are probably people in this forum that employ that mindset on a daily basis...

[David7204]

I don't see any way that a storyteller could show an AI evolving past their 'programming', I guess, without bringing in human values and emotions somehow.

[AdrynBliss]

agree with the OP also its worth noting that its not like they just said ok she needs a sexy body lets pull one outta no where just so she has one. The backstory to the body is a fairly interesting one and involves the origins of TIM (intentionally not spoiling for those that might be interested in reading it for themselves.)

[spirosz]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

David7204 wrote...
EDI's body has gotten a lot of flak here. The main complant that seems to be implied is that basically, EDI was 'sexualized' a body to draw in the nerdy teenage boy and basement dweller crowd because they love sexy robots.

You could make this argument for every female character in a video game ever. People who make this argument are simply playing into stereotypes about gamers, men, and women for that matter.

Truth is, if sexuality bothers you, that's your issue. You wouldn't (at least I hope not) tell a woman that her appearance is misogynistic, so why are you saying that about EDI? Because she's created?

Here we go again...

Somehow, because EDI's body was designed by a person (in-game and in real life), it's insulting, whereas if it "just happened" then it would be okay. It's the same thing with Miranda, her body was designed in-game and out, and people have a problem with it. Call IT meta all you want; the creator created conflict engages us in more areas and on more levels than you'd think.

People will also say that EDI "didn't need" a sexy body, that we already appreciated her as a disembodied voice. Think about that one for a minute. It's just as misogynistic as what they claim to be against.

Truth is, it was put there to provoke you. It was put there to make you think about what sex really is, what thoughts really are. However, much like other "challenging" parts of the game, "fans" spit in it's face when it didn't conform to their ideals.

In short, saying that EDI's body is "wrong" is wrong. You're saying you know what's best for her body; not her. Then again, there are probably people in this forum that employ that mindset on a daily basis...

Yep.  I liked the bolded part btw.

Modifié par spirosz, 24 octobre 2012 - 05:30 .

[Iakus]

Isichar wrote...

xMellowhype wrote...

Every form of media does this, don't know why BioWare should get flak. It's the nature of the beast. I mean consider the demographics.

It was kind of tasteless and a bit more over the top then I think it had to be but thats just my opinion.

Not just your opinion...

[daaaav]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

******.

LOL

But seriously EDI's body was a misstep in my opinion.  The thing with her and Joker was extremely cheesey, I feel like it was built off fan fiction.  They did have good chemistry in ME2 and that's why the fan fiction existed in the first place, but I feel like these things are better left the way they are.  Yes, Joker and EDI have a connection.  No, it doesn't have to be sexual / classicaly romantic.

Also, I don't like the fact that they have to anthrapomorphize and "humanize" AI in order for it to be deserving of life and happiness.  The hypothetically interesting thing about AI to me is that this is a self-aware sentient being that operates on a potentially completely different framework than humans.  Its idea of "happiness" and our idea of "happiness" could be completely different, but we could both respect each other as fellow lifeforms.  EDI doesn't need to learn "love" or "sex" in order to be a complete being.  That's just humans shoehorning meaningful existence into our own terms.

Curiousity is a perfectly good reason for Edi wanting to understand more about humans - her creators. The best way to accomplish this was to attempt to "make" herself more human. Think about it, if you want to learn French, the best way to do this is to live in France.


I really don't understand folks problems with Edi, aside from a specific piece of anatomy. 

[daaaav]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

David7204 wrote...
EDI's body has gotten a lot of flak here. The main complant that seems to be implied is that basically, EDI was 'sexualized' a body to draw in the nerdy teenage boy and basement dweller crowd because they love sexy robots.

You could make this argument for every female character in a video game ever. People who make this argument are simply playing into stereotypes about gamers, men, and women for that matter.

Truth is, if sexuality bothers you, that's your issue. You wouldn't (at least I hope not) tell a woman that her appearance is misogynistic, so why are you saying that about EDI? Because she's created?

Here we go again...

Somehow, because EDI's body was designed by a person (in-game and in real life), it's insulting, whereas if it "just happened" then it would be okay. It's the same thing with Miranda, her body was designed in-game and out, and people have a problem with it. Call IT meta all you want; the creator created conflict engages us in more areas and on more levels than you'd think.

People will also say that EDI "didn't need" a sexy body, that we already appreciated her as a disembodied voice. Think about that one for a minute. It's just as misogynistic as what they claim to be against.

Truth is, it was put there to provoke you. It was put there to make you think about what sex really is, what thoughts really are. However, much like other "challenging" parts of the game, "fans" spit in it's face when it didn't conform to their ideals.

In short, saying that EDI's body is "wrong" is wrong. You're saying you know what's best for her body; not her. Then again, there are probably people in this forum that employ that mindset on a daily basis...

And this.

[Asch Lavigne]

My problems with her body had nothing to do with sex. I thought the design was horrible (for her default look) and the eye visor was dumb.

[Biotic Sage]

David7204 wrote...

I don't see any way that a storyteller could show an AI evolving past their 'programming', I guess, without bringing in human values and emotions somehow.

They can if they are creative storytellers.  From my point of view, humans are just as much "programmed" as AI.  The difference is that this programming is constantly evolving because we are constantly bombarded with new stimuli and new experiences.  So we are running on a heuristic program that starts with our genetics.  However there can be heuristic artificial programs as well, so I don't see why they couldn't evolve their programming in other ways than to the human values conclusion.

[dorktainian]

am i the only one that thinks edi's body design is just so meh?

and who or what gave edi the right to control dr evas body?

cybernetically enhanced cameltoe edition.

[Biotic Sage]

daaaav wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

******.

LOL

But seriously EDI's body was a misstep in my opinion.  The thing with her and Joker was extremely cheesey, I feel like it was built off fan fiction.  They did have good chemistry in ME2 and that's why the fan fiction existed in the first place, but I feel like these things are better left the way they are.  Yes, Joker and EDI have a connection.  No, it doesn't have to be sexual / classicaly romantic.

Also, I don't like the fact that they have to anthrapomorphize and "humanize" AI in order for it to be deserving of life and happiness.  The hypothetically interesting thing about AI to me is that this is a self-aware sentient being that operates on a potentially completely different framework than humans.  Its idea of "happiness" and our idea of "happiness" could be completely different, but we could both respect each other as fellow lifeforms.  EDI doesn't need to learn "love" or "sex" in order to be a complete being.  That's just humans shoehorning meaningful existence into our own terms.

Curiousity is a perfectly good reason for Edi wanting to understand more about humans - her creators. The best way to accomplish this was to attempt to "make" herself more human. Think about it, if you want to learn French, the best way to do this is to live in France.


I really don't understand folks problems with Edi, aside from a specific piece of anatomy. 

Curiosity is fine and good, but I just don't like how so many works of fiction take that a step further.  Not only are AIs curious about humans and human emotions, the fiction presents this "humanity" as the final destination for AI evolution.  Maybe AIs could dabble in human behavior but then reach different conclusions for once.

[daaaav]

Biotic Sage wrote...


Curiosity is fine and good, but I just don't like how so many works of fiction take that a step further.  Not only are AIs curious about humans and human emotions, the fiction presents this "humanity" as the final destination for AI evolution.  Maybe AIs could dabble in human behavior but then reach different conclusions for once.

I would say that that is pretty well represented in the narrative. The Geth consensus doesn't seem to treat sapient beings as the "pinnacle" of anything. 

[mumba]

It's annoying because it's associated with EDI.

[FlamingBoy]

EDI was natural in me2, in me3 she felt forced

[David7204]

But it isn't like there's an infinite amount of viewpoints on things.

Consider a topic like friendship, for example. You can love it, hate it, respect it, be indifference to it, be disgusted by it, be contemptuous of it, be in awe of it, be overwhelmed, overjoyed, overexcited by it. You can see it as mysterious or scientific, mystical or mundane, forced or free, wonderful or woeful. But no matter what, somebody, somewhere has already thought of it that way and probably written a damn book on it. No matter what, you're copying humans somehow.

[Biotic Sage]

daaaav wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...


Curiosity is fine and good, but I just don't like how so many works of fiction take that a step further.  Not only are AIs curious about humans and human emotions, the fiction presents this "humanity" as the final destination for AI evolution.  Maybe AIs could dabble in human behavior but then reach different conclusions for once.

I would say that that is pretty well represented in the narrative. The Geth consensus doesn't seem to treat sapient beings as the "pinnacle" of anything. 

It's not the worst thing in the world, but in my opinion it could have been handled better.  The two AIs that we interact with on a personal level, EDI and Legion, both complete their character arcs by developing hew-mon emotions.

*image removed per Site Rule #6*

Modifié par Selene Moonsong, 24 octobre 2012 - 08:31 .

[David7204]

People have said literally every character that is present on the team no matter what is 'forced.' It's clear to me that it has less to do with the character's actual quality and more to do with the context of the narrative. Which is unavoidable. All stories have characters.

Modifié par David7204, 24 octobre 2012 - 05:48 .