579 réponses à ce sujet

[Clayless]

fainmaca wrote...

Robosexual wrote...
EDI says "I am alive". The opposite of being alive is being dead. So she's saying she's not dead. Unlike in Destroy, for example.

Anti-Synthesisers (I'm assuming) jumped to a random conclusion that she was dead(?) before Synthesis, or something, because waatheendingistheworstthingeverwaa.

Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding, but this seems like a huge stretch to make the phrase fit a theory.

If a synthetic character says that they are 'alive', then that is a reference to the philosophical debate of whether a machine can be alive, not the fact that the being in question hasn't been deactivated.

But she's not Synthetic in Synthesis, and she even says "And we will remember Shepard. Because of her.. I am alive, and I am not alone." Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible.

So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united and also not dead.

Modifié par Robosexual, 09 février 2013 - 03:11 .

[samgurl775]

The thing that bothered me the most about EDI's body was that I didn't have the choice to say "What the hell were you thinking?" and force her out of Eva's body.

[The Night Mammoth]

dreman9999 wrote...
1. So it's also Joker's fanstay then why was he hesitent to even start the romance when it was offered?

Nerves, and they were both hesitant. 

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

Not denying that, I'm just not sure why it matters. 

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.

Yeah sure, what's your point? Shepard is still the instigator of the whole thing. 

Also, the topic is about the romance not just Joker's perspective....And even then Joker was hesitent to even start the romance.

The thread is about EDI's body, the topic I was talking about before you jumped in responding to posts not directed at you, mid-way through the discussion, was about Joker's perspective on the whole thing. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 février 2013 - 03:12 .

[AresKeith]

dreman9999 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dreman I'm pretty sure fainmaca was talking about EDI getting a body as fan service

If not, then ok

I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

People do look past the body, the problem is that miranda catsuit she has that gives her a giant rack and a ****** for no real reason other than to make her a sex symbol

[fainmaca]

dreman9999 wrote...
I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

And I'm just saying that the design of the body does not encourage you to look past it. They do nothing with her character that couldn't have been done just as skillfully and probably to greater effect without the body distracting and detracting from her story arc.

[dreamgazer]

Robosexual wrote...

Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible. So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united.

I think they probably got the idea when a heightened level of communication was initiated shortly after that. Also, it's worth considering that the collective consciousness of the Reapers viewed those events, so that information was likely communicated in one form or another.

[Clayless]

dreamgazer wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible. So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united.

I think they probably got the idea when a heightened level of communication was initiated shortly after that. Also, it's worth considering that the collective consciousness of the Reapers viewed those events, so that information was likely communicated in one form or another.

We don't know how aware of the Catalyst the Reapers even are, and the only person able to communicate it would be the Catalyst (if it's even around now that it's programming has been fulfilled).

In other words it's just an assumption that everyone figured out Shepard chose Synthesis. We don't have any evidence to back that up. At best the whole "EDI was dead before Synthesis" thing is based off assumptions with no evidence, which is why I assume it was made by Anti-Synthesisers.

Modifié par Robosexual, 09 février 2013 - 03:21 .

[fainmaca]

Robosexual wrote...
But she's not Synthetic in Synthesis, and she even says "And we will remember Shepard. Because of her.. I am alive, and I am not alone." Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible.

So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united and also not dead.

Okay, then let me amend my previous post.
'If a character who has been synthetic throughout the narrative until the fundamental change you just instituted moments ago affecting her state of being says that they are 'alive', then that is a reference to the philosophical debate of whether a machine can be alive, not the fact that the being in question hasn't been deactivated.'

She says that to highlight that, because of Synthesis, she is now a living, valid life form, according to the story's parameters.

Bioware chose to have Tricia Helfer voice that segment for a very symbolic reason, you know. Otherwise, they could have chosen anybody to voice it. If the whole point of that voice over was the message 'we didn't die', then even Hackett would have worked there. It needed to be EDI because its representative of the permanent resolution of the conflict between synthetics and organics, which was facilitated by allowing synthetics to upgrade themselves to a living state. That is the message of that epilogue.

[dreman9999]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
1. So it's also Joker's fanstay then why was he hesitent to even start the romance when it was offered?

Nerves, and they were both hesitant. 

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

Not denying that, I'm just not sure why it matters. 

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.

Yeah sure, what's your point? Shepard is still the instigator of the whole thing. 

Also, the topic is about the romance not just Joker's perspective....And even then Joker was hesitent to even start the romance.

The thread is about EDI's body, the topic I was talking about before you jumped in responding to posts not directed at you, mid-way through the discussion, was about Joker's perspective on the whole thing. 

1.It was not only nerves and EDI only want to know  how to start it and was never relutent to even start it. Only Joker was hesitant.
2.What? Do understand that the basics of romance is that both partied have to have attration first. Shepard has no control over that. Any romance can't start with outi it.
3.Nope. It was not. You only brought that up when I stated you need to look at thing in EDI's persepective.And even then Joker was hesitant to start it. Looking at his perspective is mute because of that. He was invited into the relationship and he was reluntent to even start it.

[dreamgazer]

Robosexual wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible. So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united.

I think they probably got the idea when a heightened level of communication was initiated shortly after that. Also, it's worth considering that the collective consciousness of the Reapers viewed those events, so that information was likely communicated in one form or another.

We don't know how aware of the Catalyst the Reapers even are, and the only person able to communicate it would be the Catalyst, if it's even around now that it's programming has been fulfilled.

In other words it's just an assumption that everyone figured out Shepard chose Synthesis. We don't have any evidence to back that up.

It is an assumption, but a pretty safe one considering drastic shifts occur after the Crucible fired. Plus, depending on how you interpret the aesthetics of the circuitry, there's a visible change.

[fainmaca]

Robosexual wrote...

We don't know how aware of the Catalyst the Reapers even are, and the only person able to communicate it would be the Catalyst, if it's even around now that it's programming has been fulfilled.

In other words it's just an assumption that everyone figured out Shepard chose Synthesis. We don't have any evidence to back that up.

Aside from the evidence that Shepard went up to the Citadel, there was a big green flash that originated there and filled the whole galaxy, and then Shepard never returned? Hackett contacted Shepard just before the elevator (I knew those things would come back to bite us in the ass), and got an (admittedly hazy) response. Shep went up, green magic came out, and Shep never returned.

People know that Shepard did it.

[dreman9999]

fainmaca wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

And I'm just saying that the design of the body does not encourage you to look past it. They do nothing with her character that couldn't have been done just as skillfully and probably to greater effect without the body distracting and detracting from her story arc.

You not looking past her body is your problem.Just understand that saying you don't like EDI because she has an attractive body is no different then saying you don't like someone for being ugly.

Judging someone based on looks is a double edge sword.

Add, they do do something with her character. It allows her to understand organics more directly.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 février 2013 - 03:24 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Robosexual wrote...

@grey I can elaborate:

EDI says "I am alive". The opposite of being alive is being dead. So she's saying she's not dead. Unlike in Destroy, for example.

Anti-Synthesisers (I'm assuming) jumped to a random conclusion that she was dead(?) before Synthesis, or something, because waatheendingistheworstthingeverwaa.

Alive and dead is oversimplifying things.

No the view point (from my perspective anyways) has more to do with viewing her(and by extension other synthetics) as a valid form of life before synthesis. We've overcome the the barriers between the two different groups without having to break them down. We've seemingly accepted our difference. EDI even tells us at the end how much she appricates being able to have this perspective and he she "feels alive" thanks to Shepards influnce before heading out to the conduit.

Except now we're told we didn't do anything worth noting and the two groups are too different to coexist without resorting to extreme measures such as forcibly removing the barriers and eliminating the diversity. We don't embrace differnces we embrace changing everyone to be more the same. And with EDI's character development up until than it appears to be a huge step backwards to what we've already done along the way.

dreman9999 wrote...
1. Destory does not mean we can't get
along. It just mean at that time we had no choice to sacrifice
synthetics to stopthe reapers.
What we can't get along it the action we do with the event of the exteme are not forcing our hand.Saying
destroy means we can't get along with sysnthetic is like saying
choosing to save a love one over a person from another race mean you
can't get along with the race the person you did not save if from.

You're forgeting the juxtaposition of the situation at hand, we are given a large amount of exposition about why the Reapers exist and the problem their trying to prevent from occuring. We are also told that this problem must be solved in order for there to be peace. Now we're given 3 options and keep in mind the expostion about a synthetics organic problem freshly in our heads. One option has use embrace the machines by becoming one, Catalyst even states that Shepard will loose his connection to other organics by choosing control. Our second option has us destroy all syntheic life in the galaxy, we reject the machines. Our last options has us merge the two as a compromise since the two groups apparently can't be left to their own devices.

2.There is not differance between organic and synthetic in synthesis. There is not point in say what is alive because of that.

And that's kinda the problem as I've stated above racial (or in this case organic and synthetics boundaries) diversity.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 09 février 2013 - 03:31 .

[dreman9999]

AresKeith wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Dreman I'm pretty sure fainmaca was talking about EDI getting a body as fan service

If not, then ok

I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

People do look past the body, the problem is that miranda catsuit she has that gives her a giant rack and a ****** for no real reason other than to make her a sex symbol

You make it sound that she was the one who design her body and picked that suit. If you don't like the cat suit, don't have her wear it. 
Added, it was TIM/cerberus who made the body.

[Clayless]

fainmaca wrote...

Robosexual wrote...
But she's not Synthetic in Synthesis, and she even says "And we will remember Shepard. Because of her.. I am alive, and I am not alone." Remember no one knows that Shepard chose Synthesis, only that she activated the Crucible.

So because of Shepard activating the Crucible she's not dead, and everyone is united and also not dead.

Okay, then let me amend my previous post.
'If a character who has been synthetic throughout the narrative until the fundamental change you just instituted moments ago affecting her state of being says that they are 'alive', then that is a reference to the philosophical debate of whether a machine can be alive, not the fact that the being in question hasn't been deactivated.'

She says that to highlight that, because of Synthesis, she is now a living, valid life form, according to the story's parameters.

Bioware chose to have Tricia Helfer voice that segment for a very symbolic reason, you know. Otherwise, they could have chosen anybody to voice it. If the whole point of that voice over was the message 'we didn't die', then even Hackett would have worked there. It needed to be EDI because its representative of the permanent resolution of the conflict between synthetics and organics, which was facilitated by allowing synthetics to upgrade themselves to a living state. That is the message of that epilogue.

No she doesn't, that's just an assumption, all she says is she's alive. Not "because of Synthesis I am alive" or "now I'm truly alive", she just says "I am alive".

AKA I am not dead.

Jumping to the conclusions based off her voice actor, or that it just happened "moments ago" (not backed up by anything) is just that, an assumption.

"EDI's character arc was pointless because she's not alive until Synthesis because she says she's not dead and Tricia Helfer voiced her" really is just a massive leap in logic to make from "Because Shepard activated the Crucible and stopped the war, she's not dead, and everyone is united and also not dead".

One of them is based off dialogue from the game, the other is based off metagaming and ignoring her entire character arc.

[The Night Mammoth]

dreman9999 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
1. So it's also Joker's fanstay then why was he hesitent to even start the romance when it was offered?

Nerves, and they were both hesitant. 

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

Not denying that, I'm just not sure why it matters. 

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.

Yeah sure, what's your point? Shepard is still the instigator of the whole thing. 

Also, the topic is about the romance not just Joker's perspective....And even then Joker was hesitent to even start the romance.

The thread is about EDI's body, the topic I was talking about before you jumped in responding to posts not directed at you, mid-way through the discussion, was about Joker's perspective on the whole thing. 

1.It was not only nerves and EDI only want to know  how to start it and was never relutent to even start it. Only Joker was hesitant.

EDI had to be encouraged. They were both hesitant. 

2.What? Do understand that the basics of romance is that both partied have to have attration first. Shepard has no control over that. Any romance can't start with outi it.

I understand the idea of romantic attraction, I'm just trying to figure out what your point is by talking about it. 

3.Nope. It was not. You only brought that up when I stated you need to look at thing in EDI's persepective.And even then Joker was hesitant to start it. Looking at his perspective is mute because of that. He was invited into the relationship and he was reluntent to even start it.

I was talking about this for several pages before you jumped in, I know it for a fact, so I don't really care what you think the discussion was about because you weren't part of it, and frankly, this whole argument is pointless. EDI's perspective is a separate issue and one I don't want to talk about. End of discussion. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 février 2013 - 03:31 .

[themikefest]

samgurl775 wrote...

The thing that bothered me the most about EDI's body was that I didn't have the choice to say "What the hell were you thinking?" and force her out of Eva's body.

Thats how I felt. I didn't want the thing in the robot body. Also I would've thrown it out the airlock. 

[Clayless]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Alive and dead is oversimplifying things.

No the view point (from my perspective anyways) has more to do with viewing her(and by extension other synthetics) as a valid form of life before synthesis. We've overcome the the barriers between the two different groups without having to break them down. We've seemingly accepted our difference. EDI even tells us at the end how much she appricates being able to have this perspective and he she "feels alive" thanks to Shepards influnce before heading out to the conduit.

Yes, she says she's alive before Synthesis and she says she's alive after Synthesis. Not that she's alive and wasn't before, not that she's now alive, just that she's alive.

Except now we're told we didn't do anything worth nothing

No we're not.

and the two groups are two different to coexist without resorting to extreme measures such as forcibly removing the barriers and eliminating the diversity. We don't embrace differnces we embrace changing everyone to be more the same. And with EDI's character development up until than it appears to be a huge step backwards to what we've already done along the way.

Opinions.

[fainmaca]

dreman9999 wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

And I'm just saying that the design of the body does not encourage you to look past it. They do nothing with her character that couldn't have been done just as skillfully and probably to greater effect without the body distracting and detracting from her story arc.

You not looking past her body is your problem.Just understand that saying you don't like EDI because she has an attractive body is no different then saying you don't like someone for being ugly.

Judging someone based on looks is a double edge sword.

Add, they do do something with her character. It allows her to understand organics more directly.

I'm not saying I don't like EDI because she has an attractive body. I like the character. I just feel that having a body cheapens the character's story. EDI and Joker's relationship was a powerful thing beforehand. You had one character who couldn't be physically intimate without serious risk to himself, and another character who didn't need that off him. That was lost. The story is lessened. I am not judging based on looks, I am judging based on what serves her story the best.

As for the rest of the post, i never said they didn't do anything. I said they did nothing with her character THAT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN DONE JUST AS WELL OR BETTER WITHOUT THE BODY.

[dreman9999]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

@grey I can elaborate:

EDI says "I am alive". The opposite of being alive is being dead. So she's saying she's not dead. Unlike in Destroy, for example.

Anti-Synthesisers (I'm assuming) jumped to a random conclusion that she was dead(?) before Synthesis, or something, because waatheendingistheworstthingeverwaa.

Alive and dead is oversimplifying things.

No the view point (from my perspective anyways) has more to do with viewing her(and by extension other synthetics) as a valid form of life before synthesis. We've overcome the the barriers between the two different groups without having to break them down. We've seemingly accepted our difference. EDI even tells us at the end how much she appricates being able to have this perspective and he she "feels alive" thanks to Shepards influnce before heading out to the conduit.

Except now we're told we didn't do anything worth nothing and the two groups are two different to coexist without resorting to extreme measures such as forcibly removing the barriers and eliminating the diversity. We don't embrace differnces we embrace changing everyone to be more the same. And with EDI's character development up until than it appears to be a huge step backwards to what we've already done along the way.

dreman9999 wrote...
1. Destory does not mean we can't get
along. It just mean at that time we had no choice to sacrifice
synthetics to stopthe reapers.
What we can't get along it the action we do with the event of the exteme are not forcing our hand.Saying
destroy means we can't get along with sysnthetic is like saying
choosing to save a love one over a person from another race mean you
can't get along with the race the person you did not save if from.

You're forgeting the juxtaposition of the situation at hand, we are given a large amount of exposition about why the Reapers exist and the problem their trying to prevent from occuring. We are also told that this problem must be solved in order for there to be peace. Now we're given 3 options and keep in mind the expostion about a synthetics organic problem freshly in our heads. One option has use embrace the machines by becoming one, Catalyst even states that Shepard will loose his connection to other organics by choosing control. Our second option has us destroy all syntheic life in the galaxy, we reject the machines. Our last options has us merge the two as a compromise since the two groups apparently can't be left to their own devices.

2.There is not differance between organic and synthetic in synthesis. There is not point in say what is alive because of that.

And that's kinda the problem as I've stated above racial (or in this case organic and synthetics boundaries) diversity.

1.No,I did not. You forgetting the fact here that the catalyst is only doing this because it's programed to. It was forced to bring everythng to this point because of bad programing and the solution on hand are only there because of the ignorance of the beings who made the crucible.

The only choice we have is to save this cycle or watch it die. The choices in the end is only an awnser to how.

2.You forgetting the fact here that organics defination of alive is also destroyed in synthesis.

Both organics and synthetic defination of alive is destroyed in synthesis.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Robosexual wrote...

Except now we're told we didn't do anything worth nothing

No we're not.

Did we talk to the same glowing figure? He won't shut up about how the cycles are the only solution, till now at least.

and the two groups are two different to coexist without resorting to extreme measures such as forcibly removing the barriers and eliminating the diversity. We don't embrace differnces we embrace changing everyone to be more the same. And with EDI's character development up until than it appears to be a huge step backwards to what we've already done along the way.

Opinions.

Poor rebuttal.

[dreman9999]

fainmaca wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
I got that. I'm say the body brought more to her then he is implying.

She as a character is not a fan service character. Which is the entire arguement any would who isok with her character in ME3 is expressing.

We are just saying, look past her body.

And I'm just saying that the design of the body does not encourage you to look past it. They do nothing with her character that couldn't have been done just as skillfully and probably to greater effect without the body distracting and detracting from her story arc.

You not looking past her body is your problem.Just understand that saying you don't like EDI because she has an attractive body is no different then saying you don't like someone for being ugly.

Judging someone based on looks is a double edge sword.

Add, they do do something with her character. It allows her to understand organics more directly.

I'm not saying I don't like EDI because she has an attractive body. I like the character. I just feel that having a body cheapens the character's story. EDI and Joker's relationship was a powerful thing beforehand. You had one character who couldn't be physically intimate without serious risk to himself, and another character who didn't need that off him. That was lost. The story is lessened. I am not judging based on looks, I am judging based on what serves her story the best.

As for the rest of the post, i never said they didn't do anything. I said they did nothing with her character THAT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN DONE JUST AS WELL OR BETTER WITHOUT THE BODY.

How/ does it cheapen her story? In what way?

This allows herto see aperspective she never had a chance to see if she stayed just an AI on a ship, which is expanding her virew of things and some how it cheapens her character?

You forgeting she grow greating as a being in ME3. That doesnot means cheapened.

[fainmaca]

Robosexual wrote...
No she doesn't, that's just an assumption, all she says is she's alive. Not "because of Synthesis I am alive" or "now I'm truly alive", she just says "I am alive".

AKA I am not dead.

Jumping to the conclusions based off her voice actor, or that it just happened "moments ago" (not backed up by anything) is just that, an assumption.

"EDI's character arc was pointless because she's not alive until Synthesis because she says she's not dead and Tricia Helfer voiced her" really is just a massive leap in logic to make from "Because Shepard activated the Crucible and stopped the war, she's not dead, and everyone is united and also not dead".

One of them is based off dialogue from the game, the other is based off metagaming and ignoring her entire character arc.

Honestly I think I lose brain cells every time I try this.

Bioware put a lot of thought into how the epilogue was constructed. They chose EDI to voice the Synthesis one for a reason, because she is the foremost individual the player has interacted with that embodies synthetics and the divide between them and organics. Her use here is a symbol of how this divide has been bridged- she endeavoured to bridge the gap herself, and Synthesis was the way Shepard helped the Galaxy (including her) to do so.

The epilogue is showing you the consequence of your choice on the Crucible. EDI only says she's alive during this epilogue. This is a consequence of Synthesis. Not an assumption.

Anyone with a shred of ability to analyse the narrative structure of the epilogue can see that the intent behind the phrasing here is to reference Synthetics becoming alive, not the fact that they didn't get destroyed.

[dreamgazer]

Robosexual wrote...

Yes, she says she's alive before Synthesis and she says she's alive after Synthesis. Not that she's alive and wasn't before, not that she's now alive, just that she's alive.

I actually agree with this interpretation of that part, but the context of the rest of her soliloquy distorts it.  She's delivering a speech about how things have changed on fundamental levels, then she shifts into general gratitude for Shepard's actions.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 09 février 2013 - 03:44 .

[AresKeith]

dreman9999 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

People do look past the body, the problem is that miranda catsuit she has that gives her a giant rack and a ****** for no real reason other than to make her a sex symbol

You make it sound that she was the one who design her body and picked that suit. If you don't like the cat suit, don't have her wear it. 
Added, it was TIM/cerberus who made the body.

Trying to blame a fictional character for something Bioware did is you missing the point

Its the fact that its there that shows it was about sex appeal than her actual character