579 réponses à ce sujet

[fainmaca]

Eterna5 wrote...
If EDI is restricted to the ship how could she ever have known what it is to be alive? How could she understand the human experience while confined to a ship? 

And I think here you'll find is where you're thinking along a different track to many in this thread (me included). To me, being alive isn't something exclusive to those with a conventional body. Its not a state of hardware/biology, its a state of mind.

I also have a hard time grasping why 'understanding' is so important. Its useful, yes, but there are plenty of things I don't 'understand', but I can share my existence with them. If I am to believe the apparent messages of the game's synthetic plots, this world view is wrong. If I don't understand something, conflict with it is unavoidable. I refuse to accept that, and will protest this stance as incredibly flawed.

Not to mention understanding doesn't come solely from becoming the subject. The 'walk a mile in their shoes' is certainly an effective method of learning and understanding, but not the only one. Otherwise the synthetic plots, including EDI's, really are saying that there is no room for diversity.

TL:DR- EDI didn't need to become 'one of us' to advance her character. It was the weak and cheap path.


Also, for those bringing up Miranda: she may well be a thick wad of fan service, but at least she remained consistently so from the first moment all the way through. She started as a femme fatale, and ended as one. My beef with EDI (and, to a similar degree, Jack and Ashley) looking like this is that they were changed to this new appearance. They were already good characters, strong characters, and such a makeover simply detracted from them. They and the larger story deserved so much better.

[Eterna]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Even if EDI can do all those things it still wouldn't change the fact that she is the ship and Joker would have no interest in a romantic relationship. 

Why not? People already grow attached to her before she has a body because of her personality and her ability to interact. I don't see why it's a stretch to have Joker form some sort of stronger affection because he's already attached to the Normandy.

It's not that out of the realm of possibility. I won't repeat again that I don't think it should just happen like that. 

He could develop feelings for her in theory, but it would never advance to the point it did with her body to true love. Human beings simply need more out of a relationship than what EDi in orb form can provide. 

I feel like we're going in circles. 

We're going in circles for two reasons. 

You keep talking about Joker forming a romantic relationship with the Normandy, and I repeatedly say I don't think it should happen like that.

You talk about EDI/Normandy as more of an object that something far more like an actual human. It's not objectophillia when Joker isn't attracted to an inanimate object.

That's because EDI in orb form is a completely Synthetic construct. She doesn;t start obtaining human qualities until she starts interacting with people in her mobile platform. She is not human or even human like in ME2 and the beggining of ME3. 

[dreman9999]

Eterna5 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Nope. EDI can't feel attration the way we do, not that She can't feel it at all. That just means how it's processed is different.
If she could not feel attraction at all she would never made any step to attracting Joker at all. Remeber, She went to Shepard asking him/her who to get the romance statedin the first place. 

It not that synthetics don'thave emotions, it's just how they are processed is different.

No Synthetics don't have emotion, they have basic self preservation instincts and emotional substitutes. She appproaches Joker because like all Synthetics she seeks understanding of Organics. It really is nothing more. 

Base on EDI's and Legions actions, they clearly do.

It they only had self preservation instincts and emotional substitutes and are allow to change there own code in any way, why make so they can sacrifice?

You're not get theprograming with synthetics is no different the schemas with organics.

Cut the correct part of our brains and we would not have emotions ether.

[The Night Mammoth]

dreman9999 wrote...
Who make the first move in this case makes all the difference.

Why?

And the third party does not make a difference because EDI was arracted to Joker before asking for Shepard's help.
That still mean she was arracted on her own.
That does not change my argument.

Joker is attracted on his own, that's why it doesn't matter, and your argument is undermined because the relationship doesn't form without Shepard's input.

My point here is your not looking at this how a machine with emotions look at it. Which is narroing your view.

I'm not looking at it from EDI's point of view because her perspective is irrelevant to the topic, which is about Joker's perspecitve.

[dreman9999]

Eterna5 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Even if EDI can do all those things it still wouldn't change the fact that she is the ship and Joker would have no interest in a romantic relationship. 

Why not? People already grow attached to her before she has a body because of her personality and her ability to interact. I don't see why it's a stretch to have Joker form some sort of stronger affection because he's already attached to the Normandy.

It's not that out of the realm of possibility. I won't repeat again that I don't think it should just happen like that. 

He could develop feelings for her in theory, but it would never advance to the point it did with her body to true love. Human beings simply need more out of a relationship than what EDi in orb form can provide. 

I feel like we're going in circles. 

We're going in circles for two reasons. 

You keep talking about Joker forming a romantic relationship with the Normandy, and I repeatedly say I don't think it should happen like that.

You talk about EDI/Normandy as more of an object that something far more like an actual human. It's not objectophillia when Joker isn't attracted to an inanimate object.

That's because EDI in orb form is a completely Synthetic construct. She doesn;t start obtaining human qualities until she starts interacting with people in her mobile platform. She is not human or even human like in ME2 and the beggining of ME3. 

Wrong. She start getting human qualities from ME2 via messing with Joler. It  truely elivated once she was unshackled by Joker.

[The Night Mammoth]

Eterna5 wrote...

That's because EDI in orb form is a completely Synthetic construct.

So is her physical body. 

She doesn;t start obtaining human qualities until she starts interacting with people in her mobile platform. 
She is not human or even human like in ME2 and the beggining of ME3. 

I must have imagined it when she expressed feelings of mirth, concern, attachment, gratitude and protectiveness concerning the crew at the end of ME2. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 février 2013 - 02:01 .

[dreman9999]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Who make the first move in this case makes all the difference.

Why?

And the third party does not make a difference because EDI was arracted to Joker before asking for Shepard's help.
That still mean she was arracted on her own.
That does not change my argument.

Joker is attracted on his own, that's why it doesn't matter, and your argument is undermined because the relationship doesn't form without Shepard's input.

My point here is your not looking at this how a machine with emotions look at it. Which is narroing your view.

I'm not looking at it from EDI's point of view because her perspective is irrelevant to the topic, which is about Joker's perspecitve.

1. Who fantasy is this if it the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?

2.And you're missing the fact here that Joker wouldof gone no farther then looking at her from afar. Even when EDI offer the relationship with her, he was hesitent.

3.Her persective makes all the differene because it's her romance.

[dreman9999]

fainmaca wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
If EDI is restricted to the ship how could she ever have known what it is to be alive? How could she understand the human experience while confined to a ship? 

And I think here you'll find is where you're thinking along a different track to many in this thread (me included). To me, being alive isn't something exclusive to those with a conventional body. Its not a state of hardware/biology, its a state of mind.

I also have a hard time grasping why 'understanding' is so important. Its useful, yes, but there are plenty of things I don't 'understand', but I can share my existence with them. If I am to believe the apparent messages of the game's synthetic plots, this world view is wrong. If I don't understand something, conflict with it is unavoidable. I refuse to accept that, and will protest this stance as incredibly flawed.

Not to mention understanding doesn't come solely from becoming the subject. The 'walk a mile in their shoes' is certainly an effective method of learning and understanding, but not the only one. Otherwise the synthetic plots, including EDI's, really are saying that there is no room for diversity.

TL:DR- EDI didn't need to become 'one of us' to advance her character. It was the weak and cheap path.


Also, for those bringing up Miranda: she may well be a thick wad of fan service, but at least she remained consistently so from the first moment all the way through. She started as a femme fatale, and ended as one. My beef with EDI (and, to a similar degree, Jack and Ashley) looking like this is that they were changed to this new appearance. They were already good characters, strong characters, and such a makeover simply detracted from them. They and the larger story deserved so much better.

Mirada is a femme fatale?

She is the most independent woman in all of ME.

Added, EDI is not even romancible to Shepard. The relationship is more parent/child-Teacher/student.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 février 2013 - 02:05 .

[The Night Mammoth]

dreman9999 wrote...
1. Who fantasy is this if it the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?

Why does that matter?

2.And you're missing the fact here that Joker wouldof gone no farther then looking at her from afar. Even when EDI offer the relationship with her, he was hesitent.

I'm not missing that, I just don't see why it matters more than the fact that EDI doesn't make a move either without encouragment. 

3.Her persective makes all the differene because it's her romance.

Why? 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 février 2013 - 02:06 .

[Obadiah]

Just be glad the devs didn't frame EDI's butt during conversations.

[Iakus]

Here's a question:

Would EDI's character have continued to develop if she had taken control of a different remote? Say, a loki mech or a geth platform?

[MegaSovereign]

Obadiah wrote...

Just be glad the devs didn't frame EDI's butt during conversations.

Oh come on. Who didn't appreciate those shots in ME2? At the very least they gave birth to many memes.

[dreman9999]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Who make the first move in this case makes all the difference.

Why?

And the third party does not make a difference because EDI was arracted to Joker before asking for Shepard's help.
That still mean she was arracted on her own.
That does not change my argument.

Joker is attracted on his own, that's why it doesn't matter, and your argument is undermined because the relationship doesn't form without Shepard's input.

My point here is your not looking at this how a machine with emotions look at it. Which is narroing your view.

I'm not looking at it from EDI's point of view because her perspective is irrelevant to the topic, which is about Joker's perspecitve.

1. Who fantasy is this if it the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?

Language barrier prevents me from understanding what you mean by this, sorry. 

2.And you're missing the fact here that Joker wouldof gone no farther then looking at her from afar. Even when EDI offer the relationship with her, he was hesitent.

I'm not missing that, I just don't see why it matters more than the fact that EDI doesn't make a move either without encouragment. 

3.Her persective makes all the differene because it's her romance.

Why? 

1. Who fantasy romance is this if it's the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?(That's not hardto understand.)
2.Even with out the encouragement, her arraction to Joker does not end. It just means she does not do anything about it. She was not order to be with or to be attracted to Joker, she was just allowed. Like a perant allow their child to date.

3.Why wouldn't it? She is the primary reason it starts.

[fainmaca]

Eterna5 wrote...
No I'm saying he wouldn't consider her a rommantic option until she has a hummanistic form which is capable of having a fulfilling human relationship. It's not really shallow, humans seek human companionship, EDI is unable to provide the full extent of human companionship without a physical body. 

And by physical I don't just mean sex. 

Eterna5 wrote...
You may not like it, but for a healthy romantic relationship to be fulfilling there has to be more than just a liking for someones personality.

Sorry, but this is a very narrow outlook on life.

There are people in the world with no sensation whatsoever due to physical illness or injuries, and there are others who remain separated by political, cultural or simple economic divides, and yet they maintain a healthy and fulfilling relationship based entirely on the strength of expressing themselves, verbally or in written form. You mean to say to me that their relationships are unhealthy or invalid?

If the entity you're interacting with has an established personality and acts of its own free will, it is a sentient (if not living) being. The car you mention is not.

If you really cannot consider a relationship as viable just because you can't physically interact (not sex, necessarily), then I really do pity you. Character matters, not the haerdware that's stored in.

[Obadiah]

The-Biotic-God wrote...

Obadiah wrote...

Just be glad the devs didn't frame EDI's butt during conversations.

Oh come on. Who didn't appreciate those shots in ME2? At the very least they gave birth to many memes.

I was so very grateful for that Alternate Appearance pack outfit for Miranda.

[spirosz]

fainmaca wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
No I'm saying he wouldn't consider her a rommantic option until she has a hummanistic form which is capable of having a fulfilling human relationship. It's not really shallow, humans seek human companionship, EDI is unable to provide the full extent of human companionship without a physical body. 

And by physical I don't just mean sex. 

Eterna5 wrote...
You may not like it, but for a healthy romantic relationship to be fulfilling there has to be more than just a liking for someones personality.

Sorry, but this is a very narrow outlook on life.

There are people in the world with no sensation whatsoever due to physical illness or injuries, and there are others who remain separated by political, cultural or simple economic divides, and yet they maintain a healthy and fulfilling relationship based entirely on the strength of expressing themselves, verbally or in written form. You mean to say to me that their relationships are unhealthy or invalid?

If the entity you're interacting with has an established personality and acts of its own free will, it is a sentient (if not living) being. The car you mention is not.

If you really cannot consider a relationship as viable just because you can't physically interact (not sex, necessarily), then I really do pity you. Character matters, not the haerdware that's stored in.

[dreman9999]

fainmaca wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...
No I'm saying he wouldn't consider her a rommantic option until she has a hummanistic form which is capable of having a fulfilling human relationship. It's not really shallow, humans seek human companionship, EDI is unable to provide the full extent of human companionship without a physical body. 

And by physical I don't just mean sex. 

Eterna5 wrote...
You may not like it, but for a healthy romantic relationship to be fulfilling there has to be more than just a liking for someones personality.

Sorry, but this is a very narrow outlook on life.

There are people in the world with no sensation whatsoever due to physical illness or injuries, and there are others who remain separated by political, cultural or simple economic divides, and yet they maintain a healthy and fulfilling relationship based entirely on the strength of expressing themselves, verbally or in written form. You mean to say to me that their relationships are unhealthy or invalid?

If the entity you're interacting with has an established personality and acts of its own free will, it is a sentient (if not living) being. The car you mention is not.

If you really cannot consider a relationship as viable just because you can't physically interact (not sex, necessarily), then I really do pity you. Character matters, not the haerdware that's stored in.

The ironic thing about this comment is that this is exactly how EDI view Joker in this romance.

[The Night Mammoth]

dreman9999 wrote...
1. Who fantasy romance is this if it's the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?(That's not hardto understand.)

Both. 

2.Even with out the encouragement, her arraction to Joker does not end. It just means she does not do anything about it. She was not order to be with or to be attracted to Joker, she was just allowed. Like a perant allow their child to date.

Uhuh, so? 

3.Why wouldn't it? She is the primary reason it starts.

Shepard is the primary reason it starts, but anyway, her perspective doesn't matter to the topic, which is specifically about Joker's perspective. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 février 2013 - 02:22 .

[fainmaca]

dreman9999 wrote...
Mirada is a femme fatale?

She is the most independent woman in all of ME.

Added, EDI is not even romancible to Shepard. The relationship is more parent/child-Teacher/student.

I don't think femme fatale means what you think it means.

Wikipedia: A femme fatale  is a mysterious and seductive woman whose charms ensnare her lovers in bonds of irresistible desire, often leading them into compromising, dangerous, and deadly situations.

Basically, a woman who uses her sex appeal to her advantage.

Secondly, my posts were never about EDI a an LI for Shepard.

[BHRamsay]

Actually EDI having a body was a great idea that should have been taken further
1. There should have been a human romance option for Joker she'd either die in the final battle or be a Cerberus agent whom Shep has to kill
2. EDI's body if you choose the human romance remains as it looks ingame
3. If you get Joker& EDI together her appearance changes to be more human. Treat one way and EDI's body will look more severe and militaristic. Treat her another and she looks more "sexy"

[dreman9999]

[quote]The Night Mammoth wrote...

[quote]dreman9999 wrote...

[quote]The Night Mammoth wrote...

[quote]dreman9999 wrote...

[quote]The Night Mammoth wrote...

[quote]dreman9999 wrote...
Who make the first move in this case makes all the difference.[/quote]

Why?

[quote]And the third party does not make a difference because EDI was arracted to Joker before asking for Shepard's help.
That still mean she was arracted on her own.
That does not change my argument.[/quote]

Joker is attracted on his own, that's why it doesn't matter, and your argument is undermined because the relationship doesn't form without Shepard's input.

[quote]My point here is your not looking at this how a machine with emotions look at it. Which is narroing your view.

[/quote]

I'm not looking at it from EDI's point of view because her perspective is irrelevant to the topic, which is about Joker's perspecitve.

[/quote]1. Who fantasy is this if it the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?[/quote]

Language barrier prevents me from understanding what you mean by this, sorry. 

[quote]2.And you're missing the fact here that Joker wouldof gone no farther then looking at her from afar. Even when EDI offer the relationship with her, he was hesitent.[/quote]

I'm not missing that, I just don't see why it matters more than the fact that EDI doesn't make a move either without encouragment. 

[quote]3.Her persective makes all the differene because it's her romance.

[/quote]

Why? 
[/quote]1. Who fantasy romance is this if it's the synthetic who make the first move? EDI'S or Joker's?(That's not hardto understand.)[/quote]

Both. 

[quote]2.Even with out the encouragement, her arraction to Joker does not end. It just means she does not do anything about it. She was not order to be with or to be attracted to Joker, she was just allowed. Like a perant allow their child to date.[/quote]

Uhuh, so? 

[quote]3.Why wouldn't it? She is the primary reason it starts.
[/quote]

Shepard is the primary reason it starts, but anyway, her perspective doesn't matter to the topic, which specifically about Joker's perspective. 

[/quote]1. So it's also Joker's fanstay then why was he hesitent to even start the romance when it was offered?

2.What do you mean so? That means EDI is always arracted to Joker.It matters not what Shepard says.

3.Nope, EDI was attrated to Joker before taking with to Shepard about it. Shepard is the only reason it's successful or fails. The only reason any romance start is primaily base on physical and/or emotioal attraction.
If EDI was not attracted to Joker, nothing would ever happen no matter what Shepard said.
Also, the topic is about the romance not just Joker's perspective....And even then Joker was hesitent to even start the romance.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 février 2013 - 02:36 .

[spirosz]

iakus wrote...

Here's a question:

Would EDI's character have continued to develop if she had taken control of a different remote? Say, a loki mech or a geth platform?

Depends on how the writers would make other people react.  

[dreman9999]

fainmaca wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Mirada is a femme fatale?

She is the most independent woman in all of ME.

Added, EDI is not even romancible to Shepard. The relationship is more parent/child-Teacher/student.

I don't think femme fatale means what you think it means.

Wikipedia: A femme fatale  is a mysterious and seductive woman whose charms ensnare her lovers in bonds of irresistible desire, often leading them into compromising, dangerous, and deadly situations.

Basically, a woman who uses her sex appeal to her advantage.

Secondly, my posts were never about EDI a an LI for Shepard.

1.But she never does use her sex appeal as her advantage. She a woman who carried her own problem on her own back and solve thing on her own.

She is just a very beautiful independent woman.

Morrigan form DA:O is a better example of a femme fatale.
2. That was may point ageist your point that EDI got the body for fan service. I'm saying if it was the case, she would be romancible.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 février 2013 - 02:31 .

[fr33stylez]

The whole 'humanizing' EDI arc was pointless, as the endings tell us
1) You'll never get along anyways because reasons
2) EDI was BS'ing the whole time until Synthesis when she's REALLY alive