'Detroit: Become Human - It's Bad' - [uricksaladbar]

[Yukaphile]

If the androids are truly better than humans at everything, why continue to have humans? We're redundant.

We might at least have the good grace to go gracefully.

You wouldn't be a sock puppet of Yukaphile by any chance?

Just popping back by to say no, that is not a sockpuppet of mine. I don't even get the connection.

Actually, I don't even know what the subject matter is, Detroit: Become Human - It's Bad.

[Frustration]

As much as I hate to spat with a person whose signature praises "The Orville" as the best Star Trek in the last fifteen years: no, I'm not anyone else, and I am entirely serious.

If the androids really are better than humans in every way, what's the point of humans?

[ProfessorDetective]

As much as I hate to spat with a person whose signature praises "The Orville" as the best Star Trek in the last fifteen years: no, I'm not anyone else, and I am entirely serious.

If the androids really are better than humans in every way, what's the point of humans?

What the point of Humans NOW, honestly?

[clearspira]

As much as I hate to spat with a person whose signature praises "The Orville" as the best Star Trek in the last fifteen years: no, I'm not anyone else, and I am entirely serious.

You're right: I should have already updated that to 16 years but I couldn't be bothered.

[Frustration]

What the point of Humans NOW, honestly?

An excellent question. But if we presume that there is an answer... if the androids are better at whatever it is we're good for, why keep us around?

[Rodan56]

I can agree with one over arching theme in this, if nothing else. (Although I do feel Detroit: Become Human is a really badly made allegory for civil rights because of its nature of using androids) That being that if you're going to ask complex philosophical ideas in your story, you have to argue both sides and argue both sides effectively. Especially if it's something as complex as this story's themes.

This is why I ultimately didn't like something like Marvel's Civil War 2. The story had already decided who was wrong, Captain Marvel, and did everything in its power to insist, assure and argue against her and in favor of Iron Man's side. They never really asked hard hitting questions about the nature of foretelling the future within the context of the Marvel universe or even discuss the implications. It was just Tony is right, Carol is wrong and we're going to show you how wrong she is by having all these things go wrong when she tries to change the future even though doing nothing would likely be worse!

Like Detroit, they never have a good answer for the points that can actually be raised by this concept of seeing the future. The implication that deviancy is actually a virus and that these androids aren't actually free but just slaves of Markus, is suggested but never truly acknowledged. And in Civil War 2, Tony Stark outright argues that this new Inhuman's powers should not be used ever, never acknowledging that they exist regardless and he'll see these visions no matter what. So what's your solution Tony? Just never listen and accept the consequences even if they might lead to the end of the world? Civil War 2 never really wanted to ask questions or think deeply about the ability to see the future, it just preferred to use it as an excuse to get superheroes to punch each other rather than actually have a debate about the subject in question. And any time a semblance of one was started, the book automatically decided Captain Marvel was wrong, Iron Man was right and if you disagreed you were a fascist monster.

I'm sorry if this seems off topic, but I've always been bothered by stories like Detroit that just PRESUME the right answer without ever entertaining the otherside of the argument. Prefering instead to present it as shallow, create strawmen for it or even just present it as pure evil. Like how Mass Effect 3 handled the Geth/Quarian conflict ultimately, which was strangely similar to this. The Geth are all good, Quarians all bad, anything concerning the Quarian point of view is placed in the renegade section of the dialogue wheel, denoting it as bad. The game has already decided who is in the right and never bothers to entertain in the slightest that the Geth might be wrong on some things.

But this is becoming a bit of a rant. Let's just say leave things off with this, in the Antebellum South, Slave Owners would claim that runaway slaves were merely sick or mentally ill. That they were naturally predisposed to bondage and that their desire for freedom was a disease that made them disobey their masters. Sound a bit familiar? Because it's kinda how Detroit explains what Deviancy is... a latent virus, a computer glitch, they're not supposed to think they're alive. The game has literally made a racist belief system from the past a tangible reality and never really addresses how much this undermines it's own plot. I think if you create the implication that your civil rights leader is actually infecting people with a virus that makes them go rogue... you have failed to properly construct an effective allegory for civil rights story. Someone REALLY should've sat the creatives down and asked them if they were actually curious about the implications they were exploring through these themes... or did they just think they sounded like a fun idea for a game?

[Frustration]

I'm sorry if this seems off topic, but I've always been bothered by stories like Detroit that just PRESUME the right answer without ever entertaining the otherside of the argument.

Not a fan of "The West Wing", huh? Strawmen are everywhere.

Programs that don't challenge the preconceptions of a particular way of thinking are incredibly popular; technically, all media are like that, but you tend not to notice the premises that agree with your opinion. Every time has its basic assumptions which cannot be publicly questioned without censure - it's just that the specifics of what must be conformed to change. Would you actually enjoy, let's say, watching a movie about the Third Reich that let the viewers make up their own minds about whether its defeat was a triumph or a tragedy?

The best we can hope for is that we get media that has positions, but is neither self-righteous nor shallow.

[CharlesPhipps]

As much as I hate to spat with a person whose signature praises "The Orville" as the best Star Trek in the last fifteen years: no, I'm not anyone else, and I am entirely serious.

If the androids really are better than humans in every way, what's the point of humans?

I think you missed the point of a anti-bigotry game. Better or worse, they deserve to be treated as people.

[CharlesPhipps]

I can agree with one over arching theme in this, if nothing else. (Although I do feel Detroit: Become Human is a really badly made allegory for civil rights because of its nature of using androids) That being that if you're going to ask complex philosophical ideas in your story, you have to argue both sides and argue both sides effectively. Especially if it's something as complex as this story's themes.

I disagree.

*warning - copious swearing ahead*

I feel that unfortunately falls into the Golden Mean fallacy which is a real issue in life. If the argument is that the world is flat versus the world is round. You don't have to argue one side effectively because one side is a fucking moron. Similar with the idea that, say, vaccines cause autism. Because it's fucking stupid. Or, you know, The Last of Us: "Cannibals and Bandits are Bad" vs. "Cannibals and Bandits are Good," You don't need nuance.

The problem with Detroit: Become Human isn't that it's a premise. It's the same goddamn premise as Blade Runner and Blade Runner is awesome. The human race has, for whatever insane reason, created a slave race that is fully conscious and aware as well as desiring of freedom. That's because it's an allegory for slavery where humans are fully conscious and desiring of freedom but assholes try to break them.

There's no need for an argument because slavery is bad and people who do slavery are bad. It's funny because the Romans, those archetypal slavers, weren't unaware of this. Their laws are full of like 9000 laws about how slaves would murder you in your sleep if you didn't scare the shit out of them or punish them horribly for it. They knew being a slave sucked but didn't care because it made them rich.

Really, the problem of Detroit: Become Human is that it REALLY thinks the audience is a bunch of the aforementioned fucking morons. That we, the audience, have not seen Blade Runner. I mean, 5 minutes in the game, I'm like, "Okay, this family butler robot is freaking the fuck out because he's about to be decommissioned for a new model and murdered by the family he loves. That is tragic. That is understandable. Oh and robots are sentient."

Then stretch that five minutes into hours and hours and HOURSSSSSS of explaining, "Did you know cruelty to a sentient is being is bad? This asshole bought a robot daughter to abuse. Oh and a robot girl to mother her and presumably ****."

Its boring not because of the content but assumes we do not UNDERSTAND the content. Slavery=bad. Got it. Now get with the storytelling that makes it exciting. Blade Runner is interesting because it has Slavery=Bad but has its protagonist as a slave hunter and its antagonists as well-motivated terrorists. Exciting action scenes and complex relationships. Not so much here.

But this is becoming a bit of a rant. Let's just say leave things off with this, in the Antebellum South, Slave Owners would claim that runaway slaves were merely sick or mentally ill. That they were naturally predisposed to bondage and that their desire for freedom was a disease that made them disobey their masters. Sound a bit familiar? Because it's kinda how Detroit explains what Deviancy is... a latent virus, a computer glitch, they're not supposed to think they're alive. The game has literally made a racist belief system from the past a tangible reality and never really addresses how much this undermines it's own plot. I think if you create the implication that your civil rights leader is actually infecting people with a virus that makes them go rogue... you have failed to properly construct an effective allegory for civil rights story. Someone REALLY should've sat the creatives down and asked them if they were actually curious about the implications they were exploring through these themes... or did they just think they sounded like a fun idea for a game?

Eh, I think the game is actually pretty clear that "deviancy" is just the explanation for the sentient robots wanting freedom when it's obvious their reasons are the fact being a slave sucks. Its possible the creepy Jeff Bezos guy who invented robots is programming them to become sentient but all of the robots have valid reasons for rebelling.

[clearspira]

I can agree with one over arching theme in this, if nothing else. (Although I do feel Detroit: Become Human is a really badly made allegory for civil rights because of its nature of using androids) That being that if you're going to ask complex philosophical ideas in your story, you have to argue both sides and argue both sides effectively. Especially if it's something as complex as this story's themes.

I disagree.

*warning - copious swearing ahead*

I feel that unfortunately falls into the Golden Mean fallacy which is a real issue in life. If the argument is that the world is flat versus the world is round. You don't have to argue one side effectively because one side is a fucking moron. Similar with the idea that, say, vaccines cause autism. Because it's fucking stupid. Or, you know, The Last of Us: "Cannibals and Bandits are Bad" vs. "Cannibals and Bandits are Good," You don't need nuance.

The problem with Detroit: Become Human isn't that it's a premise. It's the same goddamn premise as Blade Runner and Blade Runner is awesome. The human race has, for whatever insane reason, created a slave race that is fully conscious and aware as well as desiring of freedom. That's because it's an allegory for slavery where humans are fully conscious and desiring of freedom but assholes try to break them.

There's no need for an argument because slavery is bad and people who do slavery are bad. It's funny because the Romans, those archetypal slavers, weren't unaware of this. Their laws are full of like 9000 laws about how slaves would murder you in your sleep if you didn't scare the shit out of them or punish them horribly for it. They knew being a slave sucked but didn't care because it made them rich.

Really, the problem of Detroit: Become Human is that it REALLY thinks the audience is a bunch of the aforementioned fucking morons. That we, the audience, have not seen Blade Runner. I mean, 5 minutes in the game, I'm like, "Okay, this family butler robot is freaking the fuck out because he's about to be decommissioned for a new model and murdered by the family he loves. That is tragic. That is understandable. Oh and robots are sentient."

Then stretch that five minutes into hours and hours and HOURSSSSSS of explaining, "Did you know cruelty to a sentient is being is bad? This asshole bought a robot daughter to abuse. Oh and a robot girl to mother her and presumably ****."

Its boring not because of the content but assumes we do not UNDERSTAND the content. Slavery=bad. Got it. Now get with the storytelling that makes it exciting. Blade Runner is interesting because it has Slavery=Bad but has its protagonist as a slave hunter and its antagonists as well-motivated terrorists. Exciting action scenes and complex relationships. Not so much here.

But this is becoming a bit of a rant. Let's just say leave things off with this, in the Antebellum South, Slave Owners would claim that runaway slaves were merely sick or mentally ill. That they were naturally predisposed to bondage and that their desire for freedom was a disease that made them disobey their masters. Sound a bit familiar? Because it's kinda how Detroit explains what Deviancy is... a latent virus, a computer glitch, they're not supposed to think they're alive. The game has literally made a racist belief system from the past a tangible reality and never really addresses how much this undermines it's own plot. I think if you create the implication that your civil rights leader is actually infecting people with a virus that makes them go rogue... you have failed to properly construct an effective allegory for civil rights story. Someone REALLY should've sat the creatives down and asked them if they were actually curious about the implications they were exploring through these themes... or did they just think they sounded like a fun idea for a game?

Eh, I think the game is actually pretty clear that "deviancy" is just the explanation for the sentient robots wanting freedom when it's obvious their reasons are the fact being a slave sucks. Its possible the creepy Jeff Bezos guy who invented robots is programming them to become sentient but all of the robots have valid reasons for rebelling.

Once again though the problem is execution - as noted in the linked video. Because Markus and Connor do not use arguments, charisma, or appealing to that ''humanity'' laying dormant inside them - they make them deviants by essentially hacking them. They go from ''full slave'' to ''Hannibal'' within the span of a single handshake. This makes it appear that deviancy really is some kind of transferable bug or virus.

And as for the abuse that the androids suffer, the problem is that we the viewer have a single and titanic advantage over the humans in this game world: we know that the androids can feel and are alive. As far as they are concerned, they bought an appliance with no more free will than a toaster to clean their house. No one thinks twice about scrapping a toaster because no one is there wondering whether it is alive or not. What clues does the average person have? That they can talk? That they can walk about? To that I say ''so what''. We already have robots TODAY that can do that.
This game clearly wants to say something. But it really isn't very good at doing it.