Support NeoGAF

[Buba Big Guns]

The Bernard is a host theory is more ridiculous than William's from the past. He/it would have to be Ford's pet project, generations(plural) ahead of anything else. It would also render the whole park obsolete if we are to subscribe to the many hints of some bigger machinery driving this operation for reasons other than profit margin. Bernard is already there then, pack it up.

Well I think right from the first episode they wanted to establish that we couldn't tell real people from robots. That kinda sets the prescedent for a 'human' character that's actually a robot. And yea Bernard would definitely be Ford's pet project if he does turn out to be a robot. I just think it seems very obvious at this point, maybe a bit too much.

 

[Biggest-Geek-Ever]

Well I think right from the first episode they wanted to establish that we couldn't tell real people from robots. That kinda sets the prescedent for a 'human' character that's actually a robot.And yea Bernard would definitely be Ford's pet project if he does turn out to be a robot. I just think it seems very obvious at this point, maybe a bit too much.

This is why I'd really, really prefer they not go this route, especially in the first season. Because once you cross that bridge, it's impossible not to think "...but what if they're a robot?!" about every single character on the show.

 

[duckroll]

This is why I'd really, really prefer they not go this route, especially in the first season. Because once you cross that bridge, it's impossible not to think "...but what if they're a robot?!" about every single character on the show.

Yeah but it might not be relevant if subsequent seasons are about a robot revolution against humanity, and Westworld is no longer a theme park but a base of operations as the first free colony of the robot race.

 

[TTG]

Bernard being a host would require a lot more contrived deception than any of the other wild theories about the show. Not that it's impossible, but there isn't any real smoking gun for it unlike the logos and the deliberate segmenting of character paths in the park.

You and the logos again. Should we have a little record of predictions among the regulars here for posterity? From now to the end of the season, we could each come up with 3.

I am assuming he *is* Ford's pet project, and that he's an advanced prototype of a new generation.

I don't understand how that would make the park obsolete, even if it has another purpose.

Because that is presumably that "other"(I would elect to call it real) purpose. Without it the whole premise of the show, which is already on shaky ground, falls apart. It would be like inventing a time machine to charge for a guided tour of the crusades or something. In other words a fundamentally revolutionary scientific advancement squandered on some irrelevant, tiny pursuit. The show already has a hell of a task in explaining why this work is being done in what is ostensibly a theme park, but to have Bernard aka Skynet just bumbling around the premises is like dropping an anvil on an already drowning person.

 

[Buba Big Guns]

This is why I'd really, really prefer they not go this route, especially in the first season. Because once you cross that bridge, it's impossible not to think "...but what if they're a robot?!" about every single character on the show.

Well depending on where they go with the show, it may not even even matter if they're robots or not. Like that robot chick told Williams in the second episode "If you cant tell, does it really matter?"

Because that is presumably that "other"(I would elect to call it real) purpose. Without it the whole premise of the show, which is already on shaky ground, falls apart. It would be like inventing a time machine to charge for a guided tour of the crusades or something. In other words a fundamentally revolutionary scientific advancement squandered on some irrelevant, tiny pursuit. The show already has a hell of a task in explaining why this work is being done in what is ostensibly a theme park, but to have Bernard aka Skynet just bumbling around the premises is like dropping an anvil on an already drowning person.

I dont see what's so much more special about Bernard compared to the other robots. We already know that there are robots that know that they are robots. The whole point of the amusement park is to pretty much escape into an alternate dimension, where you cant tell whos real or whos fake.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

They aren't suffering, they're just displaying the visual appearance of suffering. When ever the management talks to robots they're always telling them to turn down emotional affectation and such. You're falling into the trap that the writers have set up for the audience to think of the robots as people.

if they are only emoting suffering why do their flashbacks looks/feels like a traumatic entity dealing with residues of something catastrophic that happened to them that they can't forget/get over?

why dont they flashbacks over happy memories?

the series seems to be written or presented with an emphasis that really shitty things happened to the hosts (at the hands of the guests) and that eventually those memories of suffering are building up to triggered responses over those very traumas..... is this a wrong take? do other audience see none of this?

 

[Jack Scofield]

I think we can all agree that the biggest mystery of Westworld is if the hosts ever need to go to the restroom.

 

[lamaroo]

I think we can all agree that the biggest mystery of Westworld is if the hosts ever need to go to the restroom.

If we don't get a definitive answer to this question soon I'm DONE with this show.

 

[Rentahamster]

the series seems to be written or presented with an emphasis that really shitty things happened to the hosts (at the hands of the guests) and that eventually those memories of suffering are building up to triggered responses over those very traumas..... is this a wrong take? do other audience see none of this?

No, it's not wrong. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure most of us already understand that. There were the scenes were Dolores' first dad talks about how Dolores is not safe and that he'll have revenges on his creators.

Also, Elsie makes that comment musing about what the hosts would do to them if they remembered all the shit they've been though.

And Ford, in his discussion about consciousness with Bernard, remarks that as a mercy, the least they can make the hosts do, is forget. (implying the dangers of them remembering).

 

[Burt]

Because that is presumably that "other"(I would elect to call it real) purpose. Without it the whole premise of the show, which is already on shaky ground, falls apart. It would be like inventing a time machine to charge for a guided tour of the crusades or something. In other words a fundamentally revolutionary scientific advancement squandered on some irrelevant, tiny pursuit. The show already has a hell of a task in explaining why this work is being done in what is ostensibly a theme park, but to have Bernard aka Skynet just bumbling around the premises is like dropping an anvil on an already drowning person.

I do think that you could pretty easily write that into the nature of Ford's megalomania and God complex - if the Man in Black is Prometheus, there to set the hosts free with the gift of consciousness, that makes Ford Zeus, a petty and covetous divine ruler that seeks to literally keep his subjects in the dark so that they can better serve him. Ford withholding superior tech for his selfish individual use to remain a god within the park works within that framework pretty nicely.

Again, I don't think that we have enough evidence to even call it a 'theory' at this point, but if evidence does start to mount, it could be smoothly justified.

I dont see what's so much more special about Bernard compared to the other robots. We already know that there are robots that know that they are robots. The whole point of the amusement park is to pretty much escape into an alternate dimension, where you cant tell whos real or whos fake.

What would be special about Bernard would be him being able to go undetected by even the behavior people who are acutely aware of the hosts movements, scripts, and capabilities. When we first heard the word "reveries", they were looking at the young prostitute and being bewildered by some minute finger movement -- but they knew it was off. Being able to get around people who were professional host-readers would be a big deal.

 

[Grizzlyjin]

I hope they don't something hacky like making Bernard a host. This show can be so much better than that. The Man in Black actually being a human gave me hope this show had more to say than Watch Out for Evil Robots.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

No, it's not wrong. Unless I'm mistaken, I'm pretty sure most of us already understand that. There were the scenes were Dolores' first dad talks about how Dolores is not safe and that he'll have revenges on his creators.

Also, Elsie makes that comment musing about what the hosts would do to them if they remembered all the shit they've been though.

And Ford, in his discussion about consciousness with Bernard, remarks that as a mercy, the least they can make the hosts do, is forget. (implying the dangers of them remembering).

ty, at least now i feel im not completely off in my own rabbit hole .__.

right so, they intentionally make the hosts able to feel that much suffering. why? to trigger 'humanity' in them? isn't that a flawed approach? it can't be that simple as in 'humanity can only be triggered by understanding suffering', can it?

because that is a over-simplistic commentary on the human condition, if so. say, if person A suffers less in their live than person B, does that make person A's humanity less valid?

.___.

 

[aaaaa0]

They aren't suffering, they're just displaying the visual appearance of suffering. When ever the management talks to robots they're always telling them to turn down emotional affectation and such. You're falling into the trap that the writers have set up for the audience to think of the robots as people.

This. I mean the show is super, super meta.

When an actor gets shot in a TV show, we understand that he or she is not actually shot, there's no actual physical suffering involved, they're just pretending. And yet the resulting performance is convincing and helps us suspend disbelief when we watch it in a movie or on TV.

The hosts do the same thing with respect to guests. A host is never actually physically suffering.

Spoiler

The show has shown hosts taking "lethal" physical damage and simply shrugging it off as if nothing happened (the malfunctioning bandit in Ep1). Ford slices a host's face with a scalpel in Ep3 while lecturing an employee about not falling for the illusion, and it doesn't even flinch.

If you punch a host, and they get bruised and wince in pain, that's all just scripts triggering the bruise effect to be rendered on its skin, modifying it's responses with the "in pain" effect, simulating damaged parts, etc.

Think of the AI inside the host as a super advanced puppeteer, with a huge book of instructions on how to manipulate the puppet in every possible situation.

Mental suffering though, that's a different story.

The show is pushing the idea that the hosts are evolving into conscious independent entities that experience mental pain.

For example the hosts are finding out their entire world is a lie. That they are slaves with no free will and a harsh god who dictates their destinies and nearly everything they do at a whim. That they are trapped in a loop, performing the same meaningless actions over and over. That their only purpose in existence is to provide temporary entertainment for guests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7HmltUWXgs&feature=youtu.be&t=53s

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

but why then dolores flashback to the times she was dragged into the barn by MIB if physical pain (including ..potentially, rape) can just be shrugged off?

why does maeve flashback to the times she was murdered or killed off if bodily injury was just 'meh' for the hosts?

 

[royalan]

The pain the hosts feel is real to them, both in their perception and ours as the audience observing it. The underlying mechanisms don't really invalidate that, in my opinion.

I mean, breaking it down human "pain" is just a series of complicated chemical reactions and signals from our pain receptors traveling through our nervous system to our brains, that then causes a sensation designed to trigger a protective response. Sounds pretty mechanical, don't it?

 

[Rentahamster]

ty, at least now i feel im not completely off in my own rabbit hole .__.

right so, they intentionally make the hosts able to feel that much suffering. why? to trigger 'humanity' in them? isn't that a flawed approach? it can't be that simple as in 'humanity can only be triggered by understanding suffering', can it?

because that is a over-simplistic commentary on the human condition, if so. say, if person A suffers less in their live than person B, does that make person A's humanity less valid?

.___.

Feeling suffering, or being able to feel anything in general, is a product of higher cognitive function. When you ask why are "they" making the hosts feel suffering, I think that's the wrong approach in thinking that suffering is the key to the creators' desires. There are a lot of people in charge, and several of them have different motivations.

I think what we can conclude is that the hosts have an AI that has human-like levels of cognition. This is so that they appear real to the guests who are paying good money for an authentic experience. The park's goal is to provide an experience and make money. So they provide human-like hosts. Therefore, the hosts need to feel human emotions (or at least look like they do) in order to achieve this realism. Being able to feel suffering is a natural result of this.

 

[Faddy]

Bernard being a host would require a lot more contrived deception than any of the other wild theories about the show. Not that it's impossible, but there isn't any real smoking gun for it unlike the logos and the deliberate segmenting of character paths in the park.

I think they are floating it but I don't think it will be true.

There has been a lot of work done to have the actors playing the hosts portray them in specifics ways especially movement, expressions and body language. Bernard has been much more vivid as a character. To make it work he would need to be the most advanced host.

 

[Rentahamster]

but why then dolores flashback to the times she was dragged into the barn by MIB if physical pain (including ..potentially, rape) can just be shrugged off?

why does maeve flashback to the times she was murdered or killed off if bodily injury was just 'meh' for the hosts?

Their emotional pain can't be shrugged off. Only their physical manifestations of it (crying, screaming, shortness of breath, etc). You see in episode 1 that Dolores is being questioned in her "no emotion" state, but she still tells Thor's brother that she is terrified.

 

[aaaaa0]

but why then dolores flashback to the times she was dragged into the barn by MIB if physical pain (including ..potentially, rape) can just be shrugged off? why does maeve flashback to the times she was murdered or killed off if bodily injury was just 'meh' for the hosts?

The show I think implies the flashbacks are being induced by new code added by Ford ("the reveries").

The show has said that his patch is selecting memories from previous loops and feeding them back into the AI, maybe using its improvisation capability to construct a reaction on the fly.

Maybe his code intentionally selects previous loop memories that will likely generate the most visible or interesting improvised reactions.

For example, maybe a memory of brushing your teeth will generate a boring improvisation, but a memory of a strong positive or negative experience will generate more interesting improvisations?

 

[royalan]

The show I think implies the flashbacks are being induced by new code added by Ford ("the reveries").

The show has said that his patch is selecting memories from previous loops and feeding them back into the AI, maybe using its improvisation capability to construct a reaction on the fly.

Maybe his code intentionally selects previous loop memories that will likely generate the most visible or interesting improvised reactions.

For example, maybe a memory of brushing your teeth will generate a boring improvisation, but a memory of a strong positive or negative experience will generate more interesting improvisations?

Did we learn that the new code is purposefully introducing memories from previous loops? I was under impression that the new code had essentially introduced a "bug" that allowed hosts to tap into previously wiped memories under certain circumstances, like Delores' original father coming across the photograph.

 

[aaaaa0]

Did we learn that the new code is purposefully introducing memories from previous loops? I was under impression that the new code had essentially introduced a "bug" that allowed hosts to tap into previously wiped memories under certain circumstances, like Delores' original father coming across the photograph.

Definitely not a bug. Bernard goes on in this clip from Ep1 at length about how it's completely intentional after he reviews the patch contents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wDubJnOjuk (NSFW: Nudity)

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

Their emotional pain can't be shrugged off. Only their physical manifestations of it (crying, screaming, shortness of breath, etc). You see in episode 1 that Dolores is being questioned in her "no emotion" state, but she still tells Thor's brother that she is terrified.

i was responding to aaaaa0 who said that their pain can be 'shrugged off'... i dont actually agree that it can.

Feeling suffering, or being able to feel anything in general, is a product of higher cognitive function. When you ask why are "they" making the hosts feel suffering, I think that's the wrong approach in thinking that suffering is the key to the creators' desires. There are a lot of people in charge, and several of them have different motivations.

I think what we can conclude is that the hosts have an AI that has human-like levels of cognition. This is so that they appear real to the guests who are paying good money for an authentic experience. The park's goal is to provide an experience and make money. So they provide human-like hosts. Therefore, the hosts need to feel human emotions (or at least look like they do) in order to achieve this realism. Being able to feel suffering is a natural result of this.

cognition =/= emotion, i think

i can accept that a computer or an AI knows that a thing is bad ......say, for example, you can program an AI to understand that loss of loved one is a bad outcome, but that would be cognition. it does not quite translate to actual ability to emotionally respond to experiences. i can also accept that a computer can emote, but emoting or acting isn't actually real feelings.

i mean even in our present world there are already endeavours made to make emoting robots. just because they can smile or frown doesn't mean they are happy or sad, right?

however, the hosts' recurring flashbacks to their trauma indicate that they are hung up on those particular experiences as if they are really emotionally suffering through those moments.

somewhere, in this series, someone made a conscious decision to make the hosts' suffering a pivoting plot as if it's an assumed importance for the guests? and yet in the same theme-park, this obsession with 'realism' goes out of the window when it comes down to upgradeable gear (pistol) or mount (horse), and certainly the fact that guests are invincible does not render a lot of realism, either. so, on one hand, i am being told that 'realism' is important to the guests, but on the other hand, i am being told to just treat the hosts like they are rubbish NPCs that they are.

mhhh. anyway, i am not here to ruin your enjoyment. (i am sorry if my perspectives aren't very fun :< i dont know why my brain picks at these things that pops in my thoughts but they do. but apologies, anyway) ... i will give westworld another two or three episodes. i think the creative team behind it has interesting ideas and maybe they will answer my concerns in due time, but so far, i have to say that i keep failing at vibing with this series :< bleh

thank you, everyone, who attempts to share your points of view with me. some of your thoughts i have taken on board, and i appreciate and acknowledge your valid points.

 

[RatskyWatsky]

New episode tonight!

Contrapasso

Spoiler

A perilous mission awaits Dolores, William and Logan once they arrive in the amoral town of Pariah. Meanwhile, the Man in Black finds an improbable partner in his crusade.

 

[Paganmoon]

This. I mean the show is super, super meta.

When an actor gets shot in a TV show, we understand that he or she is not actually shot, there's no actual physical suffering involved, they're just pretending. And yet the resulting performance is convincing and helps us suspend disbelief when we watch it in a movie or on TV.

The hosts do the same thing with respect to guests. A host is never actually physically suffering.

Honestly I don't think it matters if the host are "suffering" or "feel pain". In your example if an actor gets shot in a TV show or a movie, you know they're not really shot, they're not really dying, but you watch the show or movie to follow a story, and I at least can feel empathy with the character. Movies and TV shows can make me cry irl, even though I know they are not real.

So I'd say, lots of the guests at Westworld show very sociopathic tendencies, and a certain lack of empathy. William being one exception, and if he indeed becomes MiB, it's going to be interesting to see what made him that way.

 

[shira]

The pain the hosts feel is real to them, both in their perception and ours as the audience observing it. The underlying mechanisms don't really invalidate that, in my opinion.

I mean, breaking it down human "pain" is just a series of complicated chemical reactions and signals from our pain receptors traveling through our nervous system to our brains, that then causes a sensation designed to trigger a protective response. Sounds pretty mechanical, don't it?

Well they seem to be able to manually change emotional response which is directly related to pain.

 

[Rentahamster]

so, on one hand, i am being told that 'realism' is important to the guests, but on the other hand, i am being told to just treat the hosts like they are rubbish NPCs that they are.

They're both important. Some people like the game aspect (Logan), while others feel more immersion (William).

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

They're both important. Some people like the game aspect (Logan), while others feel more immersion (William).

as an audience, i cant reconcile the two :< (so far)

like i'm supposed to treat it as both a game with high stakes but also a game with no stakes at once, my brain keeps coming to a halt and i cant move forward >___<

but, i will have faith that the showrunners will reveal more and more information and maybe some of my doubts will be cleared in due time. however, i feel bad about coming in here and making these posts, so if i can't quite gel with it in a few more episodes, i'll drop the series and you guys wont have to look at these anymore :> (small consolations~)

thanks for replies, also, thus far :> much appreciated...

 

[| Praxis |]

Just caught up on the latest episode, loving this show so far.

I can't help but think of the Hardcore History episode "Profits of Doom" particularly the part about the printing press. Before books like the Bible were mass produced and reading and writing were reserved for the minority in charge, they could pick and choose the rules that suited them best and it was easy keeping the population in the dark and controlling them with something as powerful as religion. I doubt this is a purposeful influence of the writers of the show, but it does make me think of it.

Also, a theory I have:

Spoiler

Bernard is a robot and is either the likeness and/or personality of Arnold. He didn't know Hopkins had a partner before he said and he seems to be Hopkins second in charge when other lesser involved people including the woman (can't remember her name) that Bernard sleeps with and Ed Harris know about Arnold and his demise. It would be a good reason as to why all record of him was wiped from the company records.

He would also be the perfect intelligence provider to Hopkins, he would only have to access Bernard's data (the same way Bernard is doing with Dolores) to know so much about that woman's plans.

And it's a cruel twist that they kept his child's death in his memories because that's what drove him to create sentient robots in life, possibly in a twisted attempt to create his son again in robot form. It wouldn't be good enough to just have a 'dumb' robot replacement.

Probably really dumb theories that have already been debunked in this thread, but I haven't read any of it so forgive me if this has already been discussed dozens of times.

 

[Grizzlyjin]

You don't have to spoiler tag theories unless they're based off information outside of the show like interviews or promotional materials.

 

[Corpekata]

as an audience, i cant reconcile the two :< (so far)

like i'm supposed to treat it as both a game with high stakes but also a game with no stakes at once, my brain keeps coming to a halt and i cant move forward >___<

but, i will have faith that the showrunners will reveal more and more information and maybe some of my doubts will be cleared in due time. however, i feel bad about coming in here and making these posts, so if i can't quite gel with it in a few more episodes, i'll drop the series and you guys wont have to look at these anymore :> (small consolations~)

thanks for replies, also, thus far :> much appreciated...

Well, pretty much all of the characters that treat it like a metagame have been unrepentant shitheels or at best are pretty annoying, and we are offered the PoV of hosts that appear to be severely traumatized by what's going on.

I don't see what's so hard to reconcile about it. It's a very standard fantasy / sci-fi trope. Typically the guys acting like monsters to what they think are sub human / things / not imporant aren't a very valid viewpoint.

 

[| Praxis |]

You don't have to spoiler tag theories unless they're based off information outside of the show like interviews or promotional materials.

Ah, okay. Thought I'd play it safe considering some of the spoiler accusation shit you see on the gaming side.

Not really interested in reading other people's theories because inevitably someone will be right and it will ruin the surprise if I'm wrong or satisfaction if I'm right so haven't read any of the thread.

Edit: I would just like to add that if this place was real and I went there I would be the biggest cunt (if I knew they were just dumb robots that is) I'd probably get thrown out.

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

Well, pretty much all of the characters that treat it like a metagame have been unrepentant shitheels or at best are pretty annoying, and we are offered the PoV of hosts that appear to be severely traumatized by what's going on.

I don't see what's so hard to reconcile about it. It's a very standard fantasy / sci-fi trope. Typically the guys acting like monsters to what they think are sub human / things / not imporant aren't a very valid viewpoint.

It's probably my struggle only ... I've seen a lot of fantasy and Sci fi, but usually I can't detect jarring and conflicting writers' parameters.

Maybe basically I'm trying to see if the writers are really saying the park is designed mainly for sociopaths... Or what. Maybe I'm in denial about the slant that most humans/ guests are bad bad bad... Or something. I dunno poor robots

 

[Neverender]

I think the weirdest part of the show is that people still need glasses in the future.

 

[Wanda/Wander]

I think the weirdest part of the show is that people still need glasses in the future.

My mental canon is that they are really advance Google glasses playing constant loops of the WWE Network.

 

[Grizzlyjin]

It's probably my struggle only ... I've seen a lot of fantasy and Sci fi, but usually I can't detect jarring and conflicting writers' parameters.

Maybe basically I'm trying to see if the writers are really saying the park is designed mainly for sociopaths... Or what. Maybe I'm in denial about the slant that most humans/ guests are bad bad bad... Or something. I dunno poor robots

I might be reading into the control room scenes too much, but I've always gotten a whiff of disdain from the staff towards the guests. Like they were hedonistic cattle, being herded from controlled experience to blood & guts controlled experience. Almost like a larger commentary on the video game industry. Where some developers think the medium can be so much more, and others are more inclined to give "players" a quick rush with no substance.

What has kept me interested in where the writers go with that. Like the idea that The Man in Black might be a altruistic figure in the outside world is a bombshell. Are you still a good person if you get your rocks off indulging in violent fantasies? Is it just an outlet for primal aggression or are these people wolves in sheep's clothing? It's very refreshing to have that layer of the show. I wouldn't be nearly as engaged if it was just about rogue robots or emerging sentience. Those things are cool, don't get me wrong. But meta commentary is like a splash of cold water in all the best ways.

 

[radcliff]

One question I had is the timing of bringing back a host from death if other characters they interact with haven't "died" yet. For example, Delores' story always seems to involve a meeting with Teddy. So say they interact, but then a guest randomly kills Teddy- interrupting their story loop. Doesn't that mean that they can't bring Teddy back until Delores "dies"? Or else she would witness his death and then all of a sudden he re-appears again. I thought of this when Delores was interacting with the little girl who's mother was killed by Ed Harris' character. Delores had died at least one time since her mother had died; so shouldn't they have to wait until 1) the little girl "dies" or 2) the story resets before bringing Delores back? Otherwise the little girl is interacting with a character who should be dead in her "timeline".

 

[Corpekata]

From what we have seen characters like Dolores and Teddy are on day long loops (or some other short period), provided they don't interact with a guest. So in your example, if she saw Teddy die, when she goes to bed she is reset, and a new Teddy arrives. Dolores always goes into town to get that can everyday to be the enticing farmer's daughter to guests. There are these smaller loops within the bigger ones (like Hector's assault on the town being on a two week timer).

As far as the little girl, they obviously have to design things with that in mind given hosts routinely die or get paired up with guests. So for the little girl, it's just meeting some random other person, it's not profoundly affecting her storyline. They are meant to self correct that sort of stuff, with only the major characters in their storylines (not Dolores for the little girl) being important.

 

[Used-ID]

I just have a strange feeling that Hopkins' character (or the AI controlling his body) was made by Arnold. Arnold panicked and was 'removed' from the park and then the Ford AI took things over trying to replicate the missing 'spark' that Arnold created. In the photograph that is shown to Bernard I want to say I remember "Arnold" with his hand on Hopkins' shoulder - like a father/son or inventor/invention pose.

To me this would explain why Ford has such control over the hosts, he's linked to them. It would also explain how he knows so much about what is going on in the park with the hosts, the guests and their backgrounds, and the employees. He's an AI with a body. Cold, calculating, emotionless. He sees the hosts as experiments in progress at best - failed experiments at worst. He sees the employees that work on the hosts as tools, and the corporate employees as possible threats to his attempts at recreating the 'spark' Arnold created by withholding funding / closing the park / finding out he's an AI.

Look at how he reacted to someone creating new loops for the hosts, he canned the guy pretty quick. I feel that Ford is using the set loops of the hosts to gain behaviour information from the guests. That way he could easily remove hosts' actions from the data obtained. Then using that data to further AI research.

Anyway, that's my sleepy .02 cent crack pot theory.

 

[duckroll]

Look at how he reacted to someone creating new loops for the hosts, he canned the guy pretty quick. I feel that Ford is using the set loops of the hosts to gain behaviour information from the guests. That way he could easily remove hosts' actions from the data obtained. Then using that data to further AI research.

But the guy has been creating new loops and storylines for years. It was even specifically stated that Ford never gets involved with story meetings anymore. He only seems to care this time because he has his own storyline planned and he took the chance to veto the next one to insert his in.

 

["God's Beard!"]

What time do the episodes usually go up on hbogo?

 

[Rentahamster]

as an audience, i cant reconcile the two :< (so far)

like i'm supposed to treat it as both a game with high stakes but also a game with no stakes at once, my brain keeps coming to a halt and i cant move forward >___<

You're not supposed to treat it both at once. You treat it differently depending on your individual personality type. If you're the LARPer type like Willam, you treat it with high stakes because that's your personality type. If you're the min/max hardcore like MiB, you do whatever the hell you want to get server first. If you're a family like the one who meets Dolores painting, then you're out fishing and horseback riding and ranching and whatever. If you're that couple in the stupid looking purple outfits, then you can still experience a bit of danger and thrill even while treating the hosts as things.

I've said this before, but I feel that you're using your privilege as an audience member to utilize dramatic irony in an unintended fashion, which ruins your enjoyment. Just because you're privy to information, doesn't mean the characters are too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#Dramatic_irony

 

[Paganmoon]

[QUOTE="God's Beard!";222165387]What time do the episodes usually go up on hbogo?[/QUOTE]

I believe at least GoT is usually up on HBOGO as soon as it starts airing on regular TV. Should be same here I suppose.

 

[DorkLord54]

New episode tonight!

So I'm guessing

Spoiler

MiB and Ford have similar goals in mind, then, which isn't surprising.

 

[_Ryo_]

I think the weirdest part of the show is that people still need glasses in the future.

I think the weirdest part is they still need soap. I mean, there's not a spray that erradicates everything? Like, those one of those guys repairing Mauve was saying soap is mechanical and you need bubbles... Like, how isnt that outdated yet.

 

[Parch]

This show has been really good. A little slow paced but very thought provoking.

It's been a lifetime since I've seen the Yul Brynner movie. It was a pretty big deal at the time.

 

[jett]

How do they work anyway. Is it a terminator thing where it's skin over metal or do they have a bunch of fake organs.

I doubt it affects them since that would cause more problems for the employees.

As far as I can tell they aren't metal machines. They seem to be made of a synthetic material and made to replicate humans inside and out.

 

[More_Badass]

I have a feeling this episode is going to be huge. Midpoint of the season? I'm expecting some answers and some initial build-up towards the finale

 

[YesNOnoNOYes]

I might be reading into the control room scenes too much, but I've always gotten a whiff of disdain from the staff towards the guests. Like they were hedonistic cattle, being herded from controlled experience to blood & guts controlled experience. Almost like a larger commentary on the video game industry. Where some developers think the medium can be so much more, and others are more inclined to give "players" a quick rush with no substance.

What has kept me interested in where the writers go with that. Like the idea that The Man in Black might be a altruistic figure in the outside world is a bombshell. Are you still a good person if you get your rocks off indulging in violent fantasies? Is it just an outlet for primal aggression or are these people wolves in sheep's clothing? It's very refreshing to have that layer of the show. I wouldn't be nearly as engaged if it was just about rogue robots or emerging sentience. Those things are cool, don't get me wrong. But meta commentary is like a splash of cold water in all the best ways.

this is great. thank you :> very interesting perspectives! i will take them on board !

You're not supposed to treat it both at once. You treat it differently depending on your individual personality type. If you're the LARPer type like Willam, you treat it with high stakes because that's your personality type. If you're the min/max hardcore like MiB, you do whatever the hell you want to get server first. If you're a family like the one who meets Dolores painting, then you're out fishing and horseback riding and ranching and whatever. If you're that couple in the stupid looking purple outfits, then you can still experience a bit of danger and thrill even while treating the hosts as things.

I've said this before, but I feel that you're using your privilege as an audience member to utilize dramatic irony in an unintended fashion, which ruins your enjoyment. Just because you're privy to information, doesn't mean the characters are too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#Dramatic_irony

but i can't divorce my knowledge from my audience's experience :x im not nick fury. i dont compartmentalize that well... my brain's not compatible with that kind of thinking :< sorry~

but grizzli's above post had helped a lot though. i think i can reorientate my audience's focus into looking what's going to unfold next.

 

[TTG]

I have a feeling this episode is going to be huge. Midpoint of the season? I'm expecting some answers and some initial build-up towards the finale

yea, that's why I wanted to do predictions for the rest of the season before tonight. Mine are:

1. William dies.

2. Dolores' awakening is all according to Ford's keikaku.

3. Maeve breaks into cold storage, teams up with our Shakespearean cannibal.

No alternate timelines, no whalers on the moon, Bernard is not a robot.

 

[Crabernacle]

My current pet theory is that the MiB is trying to insert himself into the game. He complains about a lack of immersion, as his massive amount of time spent in the game has led to him noticing cracks in the world's veneer. Yet he speaks lovingly of the park, from his hyperbolic origin tale of being born in Westworld, to his intriguing exclamation (that I'm hopefully not mis-remembering) that he will not to leave the park this time. Is he trying to blur the lines between machine and man? Ford and the MiB seem to be chasing the same goal, to make the robots more human than human. Does the MiB wish to become one of them? Is his quest for the maze exit an attempt to move beyond his humanity, and to finally add stakes to a game that has long since lost them?