109 réponses à ce sujet

[Killroy]

Not really. That sort of topic is something the game's story should really dedicate itself to properly, like in Deus Ex. Andromeda has already established its themes of colonization and exploration, so throwing in transhumanism would simply unfocus that.

 

This. I would only want the topic approached from a serious, dedicated perspective, not just tacked onto MEA. Hell, I would only want them to explore transhumanism if they did something wholly unique with it, like David Lynch meets The Outer Limits. If they went at it with the sort of goofy approach they took to ME3 it would be stupid.

[straykat]

From what I can tell, Hudson's only intent was to pose questions.. he only wanted people to think about these things.

 

But somehow it became more than that (and goofy, as Killroy said).

[SwobyJ]

It was pretty much it, as far as cyberpunk goes.

 

I didn't say that was all ME2 was though.

 

'Just make a bunch of explosions and guns and be done with it. (In general.) Pretty much ME2.'

 

Sure not exactly, but that seemed to be your gist.

 

And I would disagree. I can spend hours chatting with various NPCs about robotics, genetic changes, and the nature of a soul in relation to its (compared to us, 'transhuman') ability to remember things perfectly.

[straykat]

'Just make a bunch of explosions and guns and be done with it. (In general.) Pretty much ME2.'

 

Sure not exactly, but that seemed to be your gist.

 

And I would disagree. I can spend hours chatting with various NPCs about robotics, genetic changes, and the nature of a soul in relation to its (compared to us, 'transhuman') ability to remember things perfectly.

 

But I'm talking in the context of Cyberpunk. That subject almost always coincided with monstrosities... and the answer was guns and explosions.

 

Dude, I'm Streetmagic, if you don't know. You're writing me off like a Caveman. You'll know better now

[SwobyJ]

This. I would only want the topic approached from a serious, dedicated perspective, not just tacked onto MEA. Hell, I would only want them to explore transhumanism if they did something wholly unique with it, like David Lynch meets The Outer Limits. If they went at it with the sort of goofy approach they took to ME3 it would be stupid.

 

From what I can tell, Hudson's only intent was to pose questions.. he only wanted people to think about these things.

 

But somehow it became more than that (and goofy, as Killroy said).

 

Yeah at least somewhat agreed to both.

 

Hell, I'm even older and I think I've 'outgrown' even somewhat desiring such stories as 'robots kill all the things' and 'robot wants to be a real boy' and 'are you a robot or not?' (to put it SUPER simply) etc. Would be nice to see more refreshing takes on transhumanist scifi, and something that goes deeper or at least more interesting.

[SwobyJ]

But I'm talking in the context of Cyberpunk. That subject almost always coincided with monstrosities... and the answer was guns and explosions.

 

Dude, I'm Streetmagic, if you don't know. You're writing me off like a Caveman. You'll know better now

 

No I knew it was you!

 

I see what you mean. Personally I think I'd prefer if at least this one time, MEA is allowed to go as full violent as ME2 generally was, but also attempts something more 'elevated' on the other side of the RP.  But I don't know if I can trust them to do such contrast without it hurting the story.

 

But I definitely do like playing the peacemaker more. It just matters more when I know (in the game story and mechanically) that it could get much more violent, and even for good reason.

[straykat]

I'll put it another way. When ME2 touched on the subject, it was often with a warning or cautionary tale. Maybe the last choice with the collector base was more open ended, but not much else.

[straykat]

No I knew it was you!

 

I see what you mean. Personally I think I'd prefer if at least this one time, MEA is allowed to go as full violent as ME2 generally was, but also attempts something more 'elevated' on the other side of the RP.  But I don't know if I can trust them to do such contrast without it hurting the story.

 

But I definitely do like playing the peacemaker more. It just matters more when I know (in the game story and mechanically) that it could get much more violent, and even for good reason.

 

Cool.. I just wanted to make sure. I often value a lot of your posts..  the higher level symbolism in the series and whatnot.

[SwobyJ]

I'll put it another way. When ME2 touched on the subject, it was often with a warning or cautionary tale. Maybe the last choice with the collector base was more open ended, but not much else.

 

I think I'm tired of (EDIT: focus on) the cautionary tales. Not that I want some sappy Big Hero 6 about technology, but I'd highly welcome something more than essentially "Shoot the tube of the bad tech thing!" and "Sure you came back to life through tech but lets forget about it and you're all human!"

[straykat]

I think I'm tired of (EDIT: focus on) the cautionary tales. Not that I want some sappy Big Hero 6 about technology, but I'd highly welcome something more than essentially "Shoot the tube of the bad tech thing!" and "Sure you came back to life through tech but lets forget about it and you're all human!"

 

I'd rather see it in Shadowrun or something. Not here. Even then, a lot of good cyberpunk is full of cautionary tales too.. I almost think the bulk of cyberpunk is written by anti transhumanists. edit: Of course, I haven't read all of it. Just a guess.

[SwobyJ]

I'd rather see it in Shadowrun or something. Not here. Even then, a lot of good cyberpunk is full of cautionary tales too.. I almost think the bulk of cyberpunk is written by anti transhumanists. edit: Of course, I haven't read all of it. Just a guess.

 

Cyberpunk is pretty pessimistic about a lot of things, not just transhumanism. It comes from the moody 80s after all. Broadly speaking, the 50s had utopian scifi, 60s at least stayed optimistic, 70s got more problematic, 80s got dark and pessimistic, 90s starting to let up on that, and 00s returning to an at least wary optimism again. And now we're in this place where we have a big record of sci fi 'cautionism' (especially with Internet making damn sure we know of its existence) but many people with a desire to see something more optimistic with all the tech we have and may develop at this pace, but of course not too optimistic, because see: the record of darker caution tales.

 

Sci fi around now (2010s-2020s, we'll see what it is) may either be looked back on as a refinement of all we've learned, or just a bunch of ignorant blah like the 50s again in a different way.

 

But a lot of us were either exposed to (more Gen Y) or grew up on (more Gen X) cyberpunk by this point, so its understandable to have a desire to keep that going. It certainly continued in the 90s, and has at the very least a nostalgia or even retro factor in the 00s and now 10s. Its something Bioware really tried to call upon in ME2 and at least some bits of ME3. Gen X devs.

[Fredward]

I wouldn't mind them touching on the subject, the issue of adaptation to not just a new planet but a new galaxy seems as good a time as any.

[9TailsFox]

Pure energy being is interesting so maybe.

[Seraphim24]

The current "sciences" are inadequate to develop us beyond what we've already achieved.

[ModernAcademic]

Well, synthetic Shepard is already a flagrant example of transhumanism. Even the Catalyst says the Commander would die if they chose to destroy the Reapers because the only reason Shepard was alive was thanks to their synthetic implants. They were more machine than organic.

 

So yeah, let's have further transhumanism in the next ME installment, but preferably something that surprises us, something that goes beyond Robocop. 

[straykat]

Well, synthetic Shepard is already a flagrant example of transhumanism. Even the Catalyst says the Commander would die if they chose to destroy the Reapers because the only reason Shepard was alive was thanks to their synthetic implants. They were more machine than organic.

 

So yeah, let's have further transhumanism in the next ME installment, but preferably something that surprises us, something that goes beyond Robocop. 

 

Turns out to be nonsense though. Or a bad assumption. Either/or. Shepard lived and wasn't as synthetic as originally thought. It's just a feint from the Catalyst, so you would feel you had nothing from destroy except negative consequences. While all the positives came from his preferred choices.

[straykat]

Cyberpunk is pretty pessimistic about a lot of things, not just transhumanism. It comes from the moody 80s after all. Broadly speaking, the 50s had utopian scifi, 60s at least stayed optimistic, 70s got more problematic, 80s got dark and pessimistic, 90s starting to let up on that, and 00s returning to an at least wary optimism again. And now we're in this place where we have a big record of sci fi 'cautionism' (especially with Internet making damn sure we know of its existence) but many people with a desire to see something more optimistic with all the tech we have and may develop at this pace, but of course not too optimistic, because see: the record of darker caution tales.

 

Sci fi around now (2010s-2020s, we'll see what it is) may either be looked back on as a refinement of all we've learned, or just a bunch of ignorant blah like the 50s again in a different way.

 

But a lot of us were either exposed to (more Gen Y) or grew up on (more Gen X) cyberpunk by this point, so its understandable to have a desire to keep that going. It certainly continued in the 90s, and has at the very least a nostalgia or even retro factor in the 00s and now 10s. Its something Bioware really tried to call upon in ME2 and at least some bits of ME3. Gen X devs.

 

I think transhumanists are more pessimistic though. I can't help but think they all hate themselves and life in general... hence the wish to be more than they are. And that old cyberpunk saying... "Meatspace". They call reality "meatspace". These people don't know how to appreciate reality itself. They find joy in nothing except possibilities, rather than actualities. If that isn't pessimistic, what is. It's kind of an extension of the antisocial geek who thumbs his nose up at things a lot of people find fun.. like "sports" for instance. He views them as stupid animals. The transhumanist is an extension of that.

 

It's particularly pathetic in the person of Ray Kurzweil. That guy eats like a 150 vitamins a day (seriously)....in the hopes that it'll prolong his life long enough that he'll see the singularity. That doesn't even seem like having a life. He's just wasting all of his time on fear. I'd laugh, but it's kind of sad and sick. It's normal to fear death, but they have no coping skills at all. That, and like I said above... they look down on "normal life" anyways. Even if they did live forever, they probably wouldn't know what to do with their time except look down on everyone. 

[ClarkHewis]

They have touched on this with the Lazarus project and massively with the Reapers, it could produce a side narrative if this becomes a trilogy in MEA. The use of ambiguity about the main enemy could divert the audiences attention whilst a few npcs built the subplot about a break away movement within the colonists. Extropians trying to enhance themselves out of thier races using the main enemies genetics. If they were predominantly human transhumanists it would be a good excuse to create a few human-like species in a future installment.

[SwobyJ]

Well, synthetic Shepard is already a flagrant example of transhumanism. Even the Catalyst says the Commander would die if they chose to destroy the Reapers because the only reason Shepard was alive was thanks to their synthetic implants. They were more machine than organic.

 

So yeah, let's have further transhumanism in the next ME installment, but preferably something that surprises us, something that goes beyond Robocop. 

 

Actually, no it doesn't. "Even you are partly synthetic" does not necessarily equate to "You will be destroyed as a synthetic".

 

It is easily a warning about harm, not a claim about death. A slanted statement, but it does not claim Shepard is fully synthetic, fully subject to Destroy.

 

It just means 'You may or may not die', where Control is 'You'll die but become something' and Synthesis is 'You'll be added to everyone', from its perspective.

 

 

IMO Shepard indeed is transhuman by today's standards, in the real world. However, the game itself, via EDI, clarifies (though many don't seem to get this) that the definition of transhuman in the Mass Effect setting is (shifted to) more like augmentations of the brain and/or the mind's workings. It shouldn't be a surprise if a society with augmentations wish to push the transhuman can down the road, seeing as we already seem to be deciding, day to day, that people with hearing implants and artificial limbs or organs, are not exactly 'transhumans'. That brings up transhuman possibly being often a more philosophical stance than a concrete one.

[straykat]

Actually, no it doesn't. "Even you are partly synthetic" does not necessarily equate to "You will be destroyed as a synthetic".

 

It is easily a warning about harm, not a claim about death. A slanted statement, but it does not claim Shepard is fully synthetic, fully subject to Destroy.

 

It just means 'You may or may not die', where Control is 'You'll die but become something' and Synthesis is 'You'll be added to everyone', from its perspective.

 

 

IMO Shepard indeed is transhuman by today's standards, in the real world. However, the game itself, via EDI, clarifies (though many don't seem to get this) that the definition of transhuman in the Mass Effect setting is (shifted to) more like augmentations of the brain and/or the mind's workings. It shouldn't be a surprise if a society with augmentations wish to push the transhuman can down the road, seeing as we already seem to be deciding, day to day, that people with hearing implants and artificial limbs or organs, are not exactly 'transhumans'. That brings up transhuman possibly being often a more philosophical stance than a concrete one.

 

Think of it from the writers' perspective specifically. It's there for one purpose. As a feint, put in the Catalyst's mouth... to introduce self-doubt... if you didn't already have it. That whole scene is meant to conjure self-doubt as it is. Hell, the whole game has a castrating effect. Starting with the kid. "Everybody's dying." Destroy is the Shepard who defies it. Or more poignantly, the human who defies it... because I think it's bigger than Shepard.

[SwobyJ]

I think transhumanists are more pessimistic though. I can't help but think they all hate themselves and life in general... hence the wish to be more than they are. And that old cyberpunk saying... "Meatspace". They call reality "meatspace". These people don't know how to appreciate reality itself. They find joy in nothing except possibilities, rather than actualities. If that isn't pessimistic, what is. It's kind of an extension of the antisocial geek who thumbs his nose up at things a lot of people find fun.. like "sports" for instance. He views them as stupid animals. The transhumanist is an extension of that.

 

It's particularly pathetic in the person of Ray Kurzweil. That guy eats like a 150 vitamins a day (seriously)....in the hopes that it'll prolong his life long enough that he'll see the singularity. That doesn't even seem like having a life. He's just wasting all of his time on fear. I'd laugh, but it's kind of sad and sick. It's normal to fear death, but they have no coping skills at all. That, and like I said above... they look down on "normal life" anyways. Even if they did live forever, they probably wouldn't know what to do with their time except look down on everyone. 

 

I completely agree with your examples, and I know this exists within transhumanists/futurists/etc.

 

Yet I'll say for myself, as I regard myself as transhumanist, that I don't see it that way. I consider it all an extension of reality and what we do. That our imaginings of possibilities are just as real as anything else - just as its own form of reality.

 

I don't use the terms like meatspace (except at least in sarcasm) and I see value in sports and I form close bonds with others. But indeed, I always see room for improvements. Even when I don't think about specific improvements themselves, even when I don't think an improvement can or even should be done *at this very moment*, I always think things can be improved, and it is more likely than not to improve, at some point. That's where I may differ with other people, I suppose. And my 'thinking things can be improved' includes the human condition itself. However, I'm in not Singularity obsession or even Transhumanism-in-this-century necessity. If things end up close to Mass Effect where it'll take over a century from now to even get into common gene treatments, I won't be hugely disappointed.

 

Being future focused can indeed mean resenting the present and hating the past, but I just have to say that that's not where my emotions are.

[Catastrophy]

Yes, YES! Sisters, mind meld ALL the humans and drain them of all their will and life. Give unto the Godess their mindless shells.

 

For the Glory of the Matriarchate!

 

*Mad Laughter*

 

Ascend! ASCEND you gullible humans!

[straykat]

I completely agree with your examples, and I know this exists within transhumanists/futurists/etc.

 

Yet I'll say for myself, as I regard myself as transhumanist, that I don't see it that way. I consider it all an extension of reality and what we do. That our imaginings of possibilities are just as real as anything else - just as its own form of reality.

 

I don't use the terms like meatspace (except at least in sarcasm) and I see value in sports and I form close bonds with others. But indeed, I always see room for improvements. Even when I don't think about specific improvements themselves, even when I don't think an improvement can or even should be done *at this very moment*, I always think things can be improved, and it is more likely than not to improve, at some point. That's where I may differ with other people, I suppose. And my 'thinking things can be improved' includes the human condition itself. However, I'm in not Singularity obsession or even Transhumanism-in-this-century necessity. If things end up close to Mass Effect where it'll take over a century from now to even get into common gene treatments, I won't be hugely disappointed.

 

Being future focused can indeed mean resenting the present and hating the past, but I just have to say that that's not where my emotions are.

 

It doesn't sound like you are truly in the "transcendence" camp as they are then. Improvements to me are no different than medical or prosthetic improvements. It's more practical than anything. And cyberpunk stories sometimes have heroes like this too... sometimes they embrace the world they are in, whilst defying things that suppress humanity.

[SwobyJ]

Think of it from the writers' perspective specifically. It's there for one purpose. As a feint, put in the Catalyst's mouth... to introduce self-doubt... if you didn't already have it. That whole scene is meant to conjure self-doubt as it is. Hell, the whole game has a castrating effect. Starting with the kid. "Everybody's dying." Destroy is the Shepard who defies it. Or more poignantly, the human who defies it... because I think it's bigger than Shepard.

 

Really I agree. I already considered it a feint. This is an effort, last ditch or not, to dissuade Shepard from an option that does not seem to benefit the 'Reapers' (however one sees benefits for the Reapers). The information of Destroy, presumably, has to be shared - but it doesn't have to be shared in a good light. Shepard the Destroyer of Reapers may or may not decide to become something else, whether more of the Reapers or something beyond everything known. Does he stick to convictions that he's kept so far (wavering more or not) or does he accept something else of himself or his journey?

[SwobyJ]

It doesn't sound like you are truly in the "transcendence" camp as they are then. Improvements to me are no different than medical or prosthetic improvements. It's more practical than anything. And cyberpunk stories sometimes have heroes like this too... sometimes they embrace the world they are in, whilst defying things that suppress humanity.

 

I am very much into technological transcendence.

I'm just not at all quick to rely on others' specific words and ideas about it.

 

I'm not even completely partial to humanity. But again, I'm not at all quick to believe others' who speak poorly about it.

 

I'm okay with giving 'perfection' time and effort.

 

In Mass Effect, I'm OK enough with a galaxy full of 'dead' Reaper tech that may be combed through, if it comes to that (and it did, as my canon choice is Destroy). I don't need every improvement to fit my vision of the world's potential. I'll keep my vision(s), but not worry too much about the details happening.