103 réponses à ce sujet

[ThomasBlaine]

Was gonna start this thread with a long explanation of how my most recent encounter with the Catalyst got me thinking about Artificial Intelligence as it's ultimately presented in the ME universe. Suffice it to say that the fact that the Catalyst itself is a perfect example of a rogue A.I. turning on its masters, which is exactly the situation it's programmed to prevent, has removed all doubt in my mind that it's right about one thing: Organics and Synthetics absolutely cannot live together, not in the long run.

 

Obviously Shepard can't take the Catalyst into account throughout the games, but the fear of and ban on Artificial Intelligence has long been a fact of life in Citadel Space, not to mention human literature. And knowing the themes of the ending, I won't feel guilty in the slightest taking no risks with any A.I. I come across as a player. I like EDI and Legion as much as the next man, but their worth and that of the Geth as supposed individuals does not measure up against the sheer potential for disaster canonically involved with giving A.I. too much autonomy as demonstrated by the Reapers. As such, they're in for a rough time in my new playthrough.

 

Has anyone else made a point of playing Shepard as decidedly anti-Artificial Intelligence? I've been seduced by Legion's adorable body language and the cuteness of the EDI-Joker romance until just now, so the idea is quite new to me.

 

Edit: Now I wish I hadn't used so many caps in the thread title.

[cap and gown]

Morwen Shepard started out as somewhat xenophobic in ME1, but came to accept aliens by the end of the game, except Batarians, who had killed her family on Mindoir. She even ended up in an affair with an alien (Liara). Probably that mind-meld thing did more than just find out about the vision from the beacon. But accepting AI was a line that was too far for her to cross. When she first got onto the SR-2 she already wanted the AI off her ship. And she never did accept EDI. As for the robot they picked up on the derelict reaper, well he went to the Alliance. She didn't trust Cerberus, but she didn't want to wake the thing up either. (Legion was never activated.) During the events of the Reaper War she sided with Admiral Gerral and his plans to wipe out the geth. She assumed that everything this geth she ran into told her was just propaganda and never did trust him. She ended up shooting him on Rannoch. She also discouraged Joker from getting involved with EDI. She did finally warm up to EDI a bit when EDI declared that self-determination was the right of every sentient species. But when she finally had to chose what to do with the Catalyst, she saw a chance to end the threat of the reapers once-and-for-all and chose to destroy them. Even as she shot the tube she felt EDI would understand: after all EDI had declared that defending self-determination was something worth fighting and dying for.

[God]

You can do it easily enough in ME1 and 2. It's a little weird with EDI around in 3, but I suppose you can still do it. I think the first game has the most opportunity. Shep is even railroaded a bit -- "You're just a machine and machines can be broken."

 

Personally, I like my Shep being open to the idea through all 3 games, but I still choose Destroy. The Reapers forced my hand.

 

This is true. While I generally support the idea of synthesis and find the synthetic life intriguing, I don't like how ME3 forced synthetics to be more 'noble' so to speak as well as being more human than their incarnations in ME31 and especially ME2. 

 

I think synthesis is a necessity for future policy and the relations between organics and artificial machinations. I just don't agree with the complete lack of subtlety or nuance that BW took when pushing that proposal. 

 

Believe it or not, if you want to have synthetics, you need to have a means of enacting synthesis. What the Catalyst says is true (and not just from a certain point of view: any rational view would recognize the value of its proposal, as well as the necessity behind it).

[Vazgen]

I played such Shepard in ME3. It is possible but to a degree, you are railroaded in accepting EDI. Don't activate Legion at all, Geth VI makes it much easier. In the end Shepard ended up as someone who is opposed to artificial intelligence but manages not to show it in some cases. 

[teh DRUMPf!!]

It's a little weird with EDI around in 3, but I suppose you can still do it.

 

You could ignore EDI, I guess. When she takes over Eva's body down in the AI core, the top-right option basically scolds her. Then just ignore.

[God]

You could ignore EDI, I guess. When she takes over Eva's body down in the AI core, the top-right option basically scolds her. Then just ignore.

 

Still, BW was trying to push their view here. So much bias that it makes Chris Avellone's interpretation of the Star Wars Universe look like one of the original trilogy as far as pushing an agenda.

[Excella Gionne]

Shep is already an answering machine in ME1 and 2. 

[Quarian Master Race]

If only. As early as ME1 you can only lay the blame for the geth's actions entirely at the feet of their creators when it comes up in dialouge. You can't rip out and space the AI's quantum blue-box within 5 minutes of meeting it in ME2 because later it has to save the day on two seperate occasions when the organics suddenly become blithering idiots for no reason other than for the writing to push a fictional cliche'd pro synthetic agenda. You can't put the "shackles" (yes you're being very subtle there biower) back on it after the latter incident, and from that point forward Shepard basically has to accept and eventually become "friends" with it. Then you have to bring a random geth whom you have no information about the motives of onto the ship even if you sold the previous one in the hope of some useful research, just so you can sit through its propaganda film, which your Shepard of course is moved by and gains a completely new perspective from.

You can roleplay a Shepard to be somewhat untrusting of AI's but you can't actually play one that is diametrically opposed to the concept of them having free will or being considered lifeforms instead of tools (outside of token dialouge that you can't actually follow up on). Even if you try to provide futile resistance you will be bludgeoned with "subtle" reminders that you aren't following the writers' preferred narrative, such as the same AI that you are forced into being "friends" with implying you are a racist if you don't wish to commit genocide for the sake of some equipment, right up until the end when the destruction of all synthetic "life" is thrown in as an arbitrary attempt to add a cost to the Destroy ending.

Oh, and every other character who is even slightly anti-synthetic either goes through the same forced transformation as Shepard and "repents" from their racist ways or is a villanous caricature. Javik is the only one who gets even mildly fair treatment, though even there his views seem to be more of his sardoic form of comic relief complete with gratuitous use of the word airlock, and not intended to actually be taken seriously unless the player is a psychopath.

You just have to accept the hare-brained Kurzweil nonsense that the organic/ synthetic theme in this series is based around if you want to play the game.

[Vazgen]

I find Tali to be quite opposed to the Geth VI. "I knew that thing would turn on us". She and EDI also have a conversation which can be interpreted as Tali getting offended/irritated by the AI. But yes, the game does seem to push the "synthetics are alive" idea, despite giving player a choice to refute that statement more than once. 

[themikefest]

Not hard to do. 

 

My femshep fights geth in ME1.

 

In ME2, she see's only the geth during the IFF mission and sends it to Cerberus

 

In ME3, the hologram turned platform is ignored for the whole game. Pick destroy. Easy.

[SwobyJ]

Shepard is at best AI-neutral in ME1 so its no biggie. Any AI is antagonistic, and you're not allowed to be positive about it except maybe to try to figure it out a little or express that the Quarians were foolish in their dealings with it.

 

In ME2, you can be significantly more friendly to it, but its all pretty much optional. His only acceptance of AI can be just as a temporary tool. A lot of AI is antagonistic, but some of it isn't.

 

In ME3, Shepard is made to accept AI's existence and intelligence (as in, that it will happen and at times at least emulate life), but doesn't have to consider it alive or important. A lot of AI is antagonistic, but a lot of it isn't.

 

If you are, in your own views, 100% against pro-AI ideas in trans/posthumanism, you may find it increasingly difficult to abide by what changes game by game.

But for what you are still allowed to choose - it is very possible to play anti-AI Shepard. Any AI can be treated either as something to destroy, or heavily restrict, or temporarily use as a tool.

 

The most in-your-face AI to push its positive messages is EDI, but in ME2 you can brush it off and get wrapped up in the push for the Suicide Mission, and in ME3 you can actually mostly ignore her, with Cronos Station being the maximum of her promotion in the story.

 

I admit, I'm rather pro AI, so its hard for me to ignore this content. I can't just bypass Legion and EDI haha. I can't just disregard what Reapers tell me. I can't just deny what I see as the subjectivity of consciousness. But that's me.

 

 

All-in-all, Shepard in the trilogy can be a character who may at times have a tolerance for AI as advanced computers, emulators of social behaviors, and eventually maybe artificial companions --- but the line he won't cross by the end can still be at accepting it as a form of life to protect, defend, promote, encourage.

 

And Shepard is allowed to accept different forms of AI, he doesn't need to accept it all. EDI is the most pushed on us, but Legion and the Geth get quite a bit, and then the Reapers can finally be somewhat trusted, or you can take a leap of faith with them.

 

At the very end, at the very least, Shepard is trusting enough of an AI to take its information in the strange situation of the Crucible, to pick Destroy (unless you consider Refuse a worthy decision) -- shoot a tube?? wtf?? haha.

[Quarian Master Race]

I find Tali to be quite opposed to the Geth VI. "I knew that thing would turn on us". She and EDI also have a conversation which can be interpreted as Tali getting offended/irritated by the AI. But yes, the game does seem to push the "synthetics are alive" idea, despite giving player a choice to refute that statement more than once. 

I find it hard to take that line seriously given that her later interactions with EDI are completely unchanged (the same conversation you mention still ends in a heartfelt thank you) from a Legion/ peace state. Then there's the fact that in the other outcomes wherein you side with the quarians, Tali still states "I'm sorry" followed by "murdering a friend" or "Legion would have understood" regardless of how you chose to resolve the Tali/Legion dispute in ME2. Really Tali? That duplicitous machine which you knew for all of a week, that I told off for trying to steal military secrets, that subsequently got killed off at the Collector base "would have understood"?  It's clear that her becoming more accepting of the concept of synthetic life is intended as part of her character development regardless.

Nevermind the horrible treatment of Xen, Gerrel and Dr. Archer. You are pretty much railroaded into viewing them as villans, seeing as you get plenty of oppourtunities to bash them but none to really show support for them. You can show support for the quarian cause of regaining the homeworld in a general sense, but not that the geth are dangerous and need to either be controlled or destroyed simply for that reason.

[SwobyJ]

The Intelligence wasn't programmed to not turn on the Leviathans. The Leviathans were explained in the story to be too arrogant to care about that possibility (organic arrogance, etc).

 

The Intelligence was programmed to find a way to preserve organic life and oversee and establish connection between organic and synthetic life. You can even just trust the first part if you trust the Leviathans' words, and you can consider the latter to be the Catalyst's elaboration on its original programming. Up to you. But at the very least, if you trust any explanation, the Intelligence was made to preserve organic life, not to not turn on the Leviathans. Blame the Leviathans for being crappy programmers. Or blame the Intelligence for existing.

[Vazgen]

@QuarianMasterRace - I assume you referred to this conversation? I think the second version can be interpreted as Tali simply acknowledging EDI's usefulness. Of course, one can simply do the AY mission before recruiting Tali and avoid that conversation

For an anti-AI Shepard, Legion should not be activated IMO. Tali's lines change, depending on having met Legion or not. I just finished Rannoch arc today on a non-import run (Tali exiled, Legion not activated) and she is quite hostile towards the Geth VI. Example: Link

[Quarian Master Race]

@QuarianMasterRace - I assume you referred to this conversation? I think the second version can be interpreted as Tali simply acknowledging EDI's usefulness. Of course, one can simply do the AY mission before recruiting Tali and avoid that conversation

For an anti-AI Shepard, Legion should not be activated IMO. Tali's lines change, depending on having met Legion or not. I just finished Rannoch arc today on a non-import run (Tali exiled, Legion not activated) and she is quite hostile towards the Geth VI. Example: Link

Actually I was referencing the conversation between the two after completing Tuchanka: Turian Platoon, but now I have two seperate instances of OOC, misplaced gratitude to reference.

Yeah, her lines during Rannoch change (as I mentioned there are 3 different dialouges when choosing the quarians, one for having never met legion, one for having met it but having it die at the Collector base, and one for Legion itself) but it is completely undone by her interactions with EDI still being exactly the same trusting and friendly relationship regardless regardless of it. 

[Vazgen]

Actually I was referencing the conversation between the two after completing Tuchanka: Turian Platoon, but now I have two seperate instances of OOC, misplaced gratitude to reference.

Yeah, her lines during Rannoch change (as I mentioned there are 3 different dialouges when choosing the quarians, one for having never met legion, one for having met it but having it die at the Collector base, and one for Legion itself) but it is completely undone by her interactions with EDI still being exactly the same trusting and friendly relationship regardless regardless of it. 

But you can complete Turian Platoon mission early as well

[Quarian Master Race]

But you can complete Turian Platoon mission early as well

So? That doesn't make the writing any less lazy. I shouldn't have to play the missions in a specific order and ignore content to keep characters from developing multiple personalities. The fact that those dialogues don't really change is just another reminder of the preferred narrative outcome, which is what I take issue with. All viewpoints should be treated equally, or at least not be actively discouraged amd ignored.

[Vazgen]

So? That doesn't make the writing any less lazy. I shouldn't have to play the missions in a specific order and ignore content to keep characters from developing multiple personalities. The fact that those dialogues don't really change is just another reminder of the preferred narrative outcome, which is what I take issue with. All viewpoints should be treated equally, or at least not be actively discouraged amd ignored.

That's true, I was talking from the perspective of OP's question. We can now suggest him to do Turian Platoon and Ardat-Yakshi Monastery missions prior to recruiting Tali for better immersion. It is the point of the thread, isn't it? To figure out the best ways to roleplay anti-AI Shepard

[Quarian Master Race]

My advice is don't bother, because there's no such thing as an anti AI Shepard. The fact is that he/she has an "unshackled" (lol its the same as slavery, get it?) AI on the ship he/ she supposedly commands against Alliance Regs and Council laws is all the proof one needs that Shepard is pro AI. No matter how much you ignore it, you're gonna have to bring a geth on the ship, and have an AI that you have no control over in mission briefings, and bring it to Chronos. There's no point in trying to pretend otherwise.

[themikefest]

My advice is don't bother, because there's no such thing as an anti AI Shepard. The fact is that he/she has an "unshackled" (lol its the same as slavery, get it?) AI on the ship he/ she supposedly commands against Alliance Regs and Council laws is all the proof one needs that Shepard is pro AI. No matter how much you ignore it, you're gonna have to bring a geth on the ship, and have an AI that you have no control over in mission briefings and bring it to Chronos. There's no point in trying to pretend otherwise.

True. In the end it doesn't matter since I shoot the tube, 

[Quarian Master Race]

You can still roleplay a little within that. 
 
I think over time, it gets harder though, and the most dismissive you can be is a sort of Control mentality. Which is not exactly "pro-AI" so much as it is "pro-User". You're more like Xen or TIM, who just see tools and ways to empower themselves.

Except you aren't a user. EDI gains self determination and opperates freely towards the end of ME2, and you are forced to accept it. It is no longer under your control. TIM or Xen would not be cool with that, yet Shepard not only is okay with it, but actively circumvents Alliance and Council law to protect the AI.