192 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

Nightwriter wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I have no problems with the idea that machines are alive or BioWare's gravitation toward that idea. I just didn't like the shift in division lines. In ME2, the division is about the belief in self-determination. Both you and the true geth believe in self-determination, putting you on the same side against the Reapers. In ME3, the division line shifts, the geth and Reapers are lumped in together as synthetics and it becomes more about organics vs machines than freedom vs control.

To be clear it is more the Reapers and Leviathans that seem to do that. Everyone else is, by Shep's optional actions, actually getting along and not strictly thinking in terms of organics and synthetics as big blobby groups.

I definitely wasn't thinking in terms of them as big blobby groups. But then the ending came and said "They are big blobby groups."

lolikrtootru

[SwobyJ]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I never really liked the line. It's technically waaaay easier to break an organic than it is to break a machine.

I don't think it's about it being easy. But anyway, so far, Shepard's only seen a couple rogue VIs and clicky clacky Geth that fall apart just fine.

[Hazegurl]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...
I'm not getting what you would have wanted from that exchange with Sovereign. He made it clear that he was not there to negotiate anything other than Shepard being his mind slave on the off chance that he will be spared. I don't think it's fair to even compare the Reapers and the Geth's war with the Quarians. Sovereign isn't there to ask questions or even gain an understanding of anything. He is there to flat out declare that he will kill all organics. It would be foolish to even want to reason with him. The way I see it if the reapers see organics as a mistake et al then why should Shepard extend any sort of niceties his way? Him telling sovereign he's nothing but a machine has nothing at all to do with the Geth or other AI. 

What should the dialogue wheel look like for a different response to that situation anyway? 

"You have rights."
"Meh"
"You're just a machine" 

Well, we don't really know much about Sovereign or the Reapers at that point, but even if you figure that a statement of defiance is the only option, it doesn't have to be one that implies that AIs aren't alive. Shepard responds defiantly to Harbinger in Arrival without bringing that issue up, for example. My comments about AI rights and how they would have become an issue in the ME universe were just meant to establish that Shepard would conceivably think that they *are* alive. I don't think it's credible that everyone just assumes they aren't.

People say things they don't mean all the time in an argument. My Shepard doesn't view the Geth as being alive yet he respects their opinion and their way of doing things and even told Tali that it was wrong to just pew pew the Geth for asking questions. I think the Quarians got what they deserved but the Geth are machines that can be broken just as much as organics can be melted into space goo. I don't see the big deal, but that's just me. I don't see how Shepard saying that piece of auto dialogue reflects his overall views on AI.

Modifié par Hazegurl, 07 janvier 2014 - 02:11 .

[FlyingSquirrel]

Robosexual wrote...

The worst line in the series I think. It just makes Shepard look so stupid, and it's unavoidable.

To be fair, it has some strong competition from "Morinth will be more useful to me."

(Though at least that one's avoidable without the spacebar.)

[AlanC9]

Hazegurl wrote...
My Shepard doesn't view the Geth as being alive yet he respects their opinion and their way of doing things and even told Tali that it was wrong to just pew pew the Geth for asking questions. I think the Quarians got what they deserved but the Geth are machines that can be broken just as much as organics can be melted into space goo. I don't see the big deal, but that's just me.

So Reapers aren't "alive," but whether or not something is "alive" isn't very important?

[MegaSovereign]

It was a pretty dumb quote even without considering ME2 or ME3....

Even if Sovereign wasn't just a machine, there is no reason to believe that it can't be destroyed.

[RatThing]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

[ImaginaryMatter]

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 07 janvier 2014 - 05:27 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Daemul wrote...

General TSAR wrote...

RatThing wrote...
I've already figured Weekes likes to push his opinion on the player after watching that panel where he called the Quarians racists. 

Seriously? 

Go to 3:30




They pretty much are tbh.

Thanks for the link.

Look, I'm really not a Weekes fanboy. He, like Drew K, has become quite overrated post-ME3. That said, I'm not seeing anything wrong with his statements here. He's just using the word "racist" broadly to mean "anti-geth" from what I see.

I mean, we know for a fact they're not all racist, anyway. There's Koris.

[RatThing]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

Yes, I know that one, what exactly are you trying to tell me with that? There are enough people in the MEU who just don't see AI's as alive. Not only punching bag Raan, it's also Chakwas, Javik, Ashley, TIM, the Salarian counsilor who calls Legion a trophy. Liara is uncertain. Only TIM and Raan express the desire to use them as "slaves". It's a possible view in the MEU, just not a popular one among the writers.
And it's interesting that L'etoille also says
"Emotions would ruin the uniqueness of the geth. They're not humans. They're not organics, at the mercy of hormones and subjective senses. They're Different." 
So at least we are allowed to view them as different.

Modifié par RatThing, 07 janvier 2014 - 05:39 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

RatThing wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

Yes, I know that one, what exactly are you trying to tell me with that? There are enough people in the MEU who just don't see AI's as alive. Not only punching bag Raan, it's also Chakwas, Javik, Ashley, TIM, the Salarian counsilor who calls Legion a trophy. Liara is uncertain. Only TIM and Raan express the desire to use them as "slaves". It's a possible view in the MEU, just not a popular one among the writers.
And it's interesting that L'etoille also says
"Emotions would ruin the uniqueness of the geth. They're not humans. They're not organics, at the mercy of hormones and subjective senses. They're Different." 
So at least we are allowed to view them as different.

I just thought it was relevant. I was just kind of throwing it out there, but I wasn't sure if I should have just posted it or put it in as a response to something else.

[DeinonSlayer]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

What the writers seem to have failed to accomodate in ME3's dialogue is those of us who judge synthetics on account of their actions, same as anybody else. After gunning down the Geth VI in my canon playthrough (utterly remorseless over siding with the Reapers, casually announced its intent to exterminate the Quarians, habitual liar etc. etc. etc.), I had to roll my eyes when EDI started pouting about Shepard's "racism." I can appreciate the desire to see them as not being alive - I've RP'd Shepards who do, and Shepards who don't, but it's tough to articulate my personal position in-game. It sucks that our only choices are to advocate use of Reaper code or assert that the Geth aren't alive.

If they didn't want us judging the Geth for having done these things, they either should have directly addressed it or never established it as having happened in the first place. The whole sweep-the-mountain-of-corpses-under-the-rug-and-profess-innocence thing really didn't win me over.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 07 janvier 2014 - 05:52 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

What the writers seem to have failed to accomodate in ME3's dialogue is those of us who judge synthetics on account of their actions, same as anybody else. After gunning down the Geth VI in my canon playthrough (utterly remorseless over siding with the Reapers, casually announced its intent to exterminate the Quarians, habitual liar etc. etc. etc.), I had to roll my eyes when EDI started pouting about Shepard's "racism."

If they didn't want us judging the Geth for having done these things, they either should have directly addressed it or never established it as having happened in the first place. The whole sweep-the-mountain-of-corpses-under-the-rug-and-profess-innocence thing really didn't win me over.

I chalk this all up to the change of writers throughout the series and the lack of planning these things out a head of time. I guess the new writers wanted it swept under the rug to, or there was too little time to expand on these things.

I do agree with you that Shepard should have had a chance to call the Geth out, that we shouldn't have been beaten over the head with how cuddly and innocent they were, and that there should have been more relatable/less-crazy Quarians.

[David7204]

In a game that pushes very strong themes of unity, it's pretty much inevitable that people who are hostile to those themes are going to be left out.

Which is well and good, frankly. It's not something that should be catered to.

[RatThing]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

RatThing wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Guys, what Weekes said isn't that catastrophic. It makes sense that the quarian account of the Morning War would be heavily biased in their favor. There is nothing ridiculous about that declaration. Are the quarians "racist" against the geth? Yes, they are, but only if you consider the geth to be a living race. And frankly, it seems that BioWare wants us to consider synthetics as living beings.

And that's exactly the problem. It's an open question at best (even in the MEU itself), not an established fact like they want us to believe.  

From http://www.holdtheli...e-reapers.4229/

Chris l'Etoile: "There was always a knowledge among the writers that the treatment of AIs in Council Space is pure racism on the part of organics, akin to the legal and moral handwavings used throughout history to justify slavery of "lesser races.""

Yes, I know that one, what exactly are you trying to tell me with that? There are enough people in the MEU who just don't see AI's as alive. Not only punching bag Raan, it's also Chakwas, Javik, Ashley, TIM, the Salarian counsilor who calls Legion a trophy. Liara is uncertain. Only TIM and Raan express the desire to use them as "slaves". It's a possible view in the MEU, just not a popular one among the writers.
And it's interesting that L'etoille also says
"Emotions would ruin the uniqueness of the geth. They're not humans. They're not organics, at the mercy of hormones and subjective senses. They're Different." 
So at least we are allowed to view them as different.

I just thought it was relevant. I was just kind of throwing it out there, but I wasn't sure if I should have just posted it or put it in as a response to something else.

I didn't mean to give a harsh response if you think that. Yes, the writers intentions were clear from the beginning, but I'd assume they at least would respect if we'd come to a different conclusion.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

In a game that pushes very strong themes of unity, it's pretty much inevitable that people who are hostile to those themes are going to be left out.

Which is well and good, frankly. It's not something that should be catered to.

Who's hostile to what now? The idea that synthetics are alive or not? The way I see it, if they're gonna ask the question, they ought to let people answer it as they wish (and to be fair, for the most part they leave the option even if they tried really hard to make you look like an ass if you disagreed with them).

I'd have liked if it were possible to choose to continue to interact with EDI via the ME2 holographic terminals instead of hunting down her body to talk to her. It'd be interesting if Bioware collected data to see which method people preferred: convenience or anthropomorphism. Even that really wouldn't have a bearing on whether players view her as "alive" or not, simply in what form they prefer to recognize her.

I personally preferred "I am the ship" over Joker's... uh... "shipping."

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 07 janvier 2014 - 06:12 .

[David7204]

Such 'data' is going to indicate at most how well players tolerate loading screens. Not 'what form' they prefer EDI to be. I would prefer to recognize her as the body, but I'd still talk to the holographs if the dialogue was the same.

Players are free to answer questions however they wish (they always are). However, those answers certainly shouldn't be given the same the same credibility. And indeed they aren't. As it should be.

[CosmicGnosis]

... I wish that Chris l'Etoile had worked on ME3.

[ImaginaryMatter]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I personally preferred "I am the ship" over Joker's... uh... "shipping."

ba-dum-ch

I wish the movie 'her' came out before ME3 so the writers knew you could have a touching romance without the cliche sexy robot thing.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

Such 'data' is going to indicate at most how well players tolerate loading screens. Not 'what form' they prefer EDI to be. I would prefer to recognize her as the body, but I'd still talk to the holographs if the dialogue was the same.

Players are free to answer questions however they wish (they always are). However, those answers certainly shouldn't be given the same the same credibility. And indeed they aren't. As it should be.

If the best the player can do is voice a strawman version of the position they want to take, all that does is frustrate the player. It doesn't validate the writer's position or change the player's mind simply because they denied the player the ability to voice their position. For instance, ME1 - just because I have no choice but to either thumb my nose at the Quarians' situation or make excuses for the Geth when told about the Morning War doesn't mean I agree with that position. Similarly, I've read posts by players who kill the Rachni Queen who actually mute the game when they make the choice because Shepard's dialogue accompanying the decision (painting it as a choice made out of heartlessness instead of responsibility to everyone else) is so wince-worthy.

It's the same in ME3. Chakwas and Adam debating in the mess hall, time to say whether Synthetics are alive or not. OK, Mark, use your "wrathful renegade" voice for the latter.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 07 janvier 2014 - 06:25 .

[CosmicGnosis]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Similarly, I've read posts by players who kill the Rachni Queen who actually mute the game when they make the choice because Shepard's dialogue accompanying the decision (painting it as a choice made out of heartlessness instead of responsibility to everyone else) is so wince-worthy.

Heh, that's a shame. I like having a voiced protagonist, but the lack of dialogue options and appropriate tones often lead to situations like this one.

[dreamgazer]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I personally preferred "I am the ship" over Joker's... uh... "shipping."

ba-dum-ch

I wish the movie 'her' came out before ME3 so the writers knew you could have a touching romance without the cliche sexy robot thing.

Have you seen it?

[Hazegurl]

AlanC9 wrote...

Hazegurl wrote...
My Shepard doesn't view the Geth as being alive yet he respects their opinion and their way of doing things and even told Tali that it was wrong to just pew pew the Geth for asking questions. I think the Quarians got what they deserved but the Geth are machines that can be broken just as much as organics can be melted into space goo. I don't see the big deal, but that's just me.

So Reapers aren't "alive," but whether or not something is "alive" isn't very important?

The Reapers aren't alive and I don't care if they think they are. Is more accurate.  

[RatThing]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Such 'data' is going to indicate at most how well players tolerate loading screens. Not 'what form' they prefer EDI to be. I would prefer to recognize her as the body, but I'd still talk to the holographs if the dialogue was the same.

Players are free to answer questions however they wish (they always are). However, those answers certainly shouldn't be given the same the same credibility. And indeed they aren't. As it should be.

If the best the player can do is voice a strawman version of the position they want to take, all that does is frustrate the player. It doesn't validate the writer's position or change the player's mind simply because they denied the player the ability to voice their position. For instance, ME1 - just because I have no choice but to either thumb my nose at the Quarians' situation or make excuses for the Geth when told about the Morning War doesn't mean I agree with that position. Similarly, I've read posts by players who kill the Rachni Queen who actually mute the game when they make the choice because Shepard's dialogue accompanying the decision (painting it as a choice made out of heartlessness instead of responsibility to everyone else) is so wince-worthy.

It's the same in ME3. Chakwas and Adam debating in the mess hall, time to say whether Synthetics are alive or not. OK, Mark, use your "wrathful renegade" voice for the latter.

I couldn't have said it any better, and it's a big problem throughout the whole trilogy ( in lots of situations). Also, the writers task is to ask questions, not to give answers. That's at least what my literature teacher taught me at school.