The Official Good Television Thread

[Einherjar86]

What do you mean? It's just a park, like Jurassic Park was. They don't plug in or anything like that, they take a train in from the headquarters. It isn't any kind of virtual media platform... otherwise, why would you need real androids?

 

[~Neurotica]

i was thinking - what if 2 visitors meet each other in the park and not knowing that they're visitors but thinking they're hosts - shoot each other?

 

[Einherjar86]

I've wondered about that too. Have we ever seen any pre-entry agreement - waivers, or anything like that? I feel like the show may have addressed this in the second episode, when it introduces William, but I can't remember. I imagine, even despite all the protective measures the park (supposedly) takes, that newcomers have to sign some kind of liability document.

Alternatively, I also seem to recall there being one scene (maybe others can verify this) in which a human is shot by another human, and while it isn't lethal, it looked like it hurt like hell. So possibly there's some kind of bullet-scale, as outrageous as that sounds: that hosts use bullets on the low end of the scale, that can only damage one another, while humans use higher-scale rounds that penetrate android skin but not human skin.

I'm not sure to be honest. It's also possible that the show doesn't care to explain this at all.

At the outset we're led to believe that there are Asimov-ian laws programmed in to the androids preventing them from harming hosts, but we clearly can't appeal to those.

 

[rms]

why would you need real androids?

why would a program this sophisticated allow itself to be destroyed by not allowing users their own 'world'?

The show doesn't even indulge the real logistics if it is in fact a physical world. Taking horse rides into the middle of the desert without food or water is fucking stupid on all levels and no company would allow that to happen let alone why would you want to experience the real shitty parts of that trek?

When there are just shootings at the tavern every day at the same time, does the company let those bodies lay there all day and then pick them up at night and then drop them back off? That's ridiculously ineffective. The world is moving towards VR and Westworld wants to the exact opposite?

We also don't know if any androids are 'real,' we see no interaction with androids and non-Westworld people.

and I thought we've been shown hosts getting shot without suffering any physical consequences?

 

[Einherjar86]

I'm not trying to make an argument for the effectiveness or practicality of the park. I'm just telling you how it is. It's a physical park. And yes, the employees do go in at night and pick up the bodies, take them back to headquarters, hose them down, and reset them. We see them do it in the show.

We've never seen hosts get shot with no physical consequences, except in circumstances involving their "awakening" or possibly Dolores's dream sequences.

 

[rms]

wasn't ed harris' character shot a shitload of time in the first or second episode?

practicality is vital to this show. if I go in every day and shoot all the hookers because i'm Dylan Roof then why would the company allow me to exist in the same space as a guy who wants to have sex with them

but you totally ignored the realism aspect which is dumb. why pay large sums of $ to be limited by your physical capabilities? only the 'athletic' wealthy fit into your economic scheme? ridiculous

and you ignored the 'real' android thing as well, we don't know if anything is real.

 

[Einherjar86]

Ed Harris's character - "the Man is Black" - isn't an android.

If you pay enough money, you can do whatever the fuck you want to these hosts - that's the point. This park apparently generates enough money to give human patrons the pleasure (as sick as that is) of a "real" experience.

Stop telling me that I'm ignoring things, when you're the one who clearly didn't pay close attention while watching the show. I'm not ignoring anything, I'm telling you what the park is. It's a physical park, newcomers get into it by train, and that's that. There isn't any VR aspect to it.

What do physical limitations matter if you can't be harmed by the androids?

Here's the show's creators explaining its "reality":

Nolan says he and Joy conceived Westworld’s purposefully ambiguous near-future as a place where VR is for the masses. Only the truly wealthy can indulge their fantasies with genuine sensory responses. "With Westworld," Nolan says, "we’re looking for the next moment" beyond video games, beyond VR. In the scripted words of the park’s marketing team, Nolan’s pitch to prospective attendees is, "Forget VR. Come here because it’s real."

http://www.theverge.com/2016/10/3/13150798/westworld-hbo-jonathan-nolan-lisa-joy-violent-video-games

 

[rms]

Stop telling me that I'm ignoring things, when you're the one who clearly didn't pay close attention while watching the show. I'm not ignoring anything

then maybe stop ignoring my questions/points?

Ed Harris's character - "the Man is Black" - isn't an android.

was he or was he not shot? didn't say he was an android or not, I asked was he shot. We saw him take the wound in the arm but feeling confident he got lit up early and suffered no consequences

If you pay enough money, you can do whatever the fuck you want to these hosts - that's the point.

that's not the point. If I want to kill hookers and you want to fuck them and I get there first, you cannot enjoy what the park is for you. You can't do what you want and you aren't guaranteed what you paid for. It's illogical for a business to do this

What do physical limitations matter if you can't be harmed by the androids?

sleep? hunger? thirst? physical exhaustion? erectile dysfunction?

I'm telling you what the park is. It's a physical park, newcomers get into it by train, and that's that. There isn't any VR aspect to it.

didn't deny that this was shown in the series, just denying that it's 'reality' as we would call it.

Here's the show's creators explaining its "reality":

"we’re looking for the next moment" beyond video games, beyond VR. In the scripted words of the park’s marketing team, Nolan’s pitch to prospective attendees is, "Forget VR. Come here because it’s real.

ignoring philosophical and scientific discoveries/discussions just to implement your own world is a tad ridiculous but I don't have any interest in believing what the writers want to portray or want us to believe.

the season finale asks the viewer to contemplate 'reality' with the death of Ford and the 'choice' in Maeve's storyline. To act like the viewers cannot be manipulated in the same ways as Bernard or Dolores seems to not coincide with the questions/thoughts provoked by the 1st season

 

[Einherjar86]

then maybe stop ignoring my questions/points?

I'm ignoring them because you're blatantly disregarding details we've been shown in the series. I won't argue about what might be true beyond the scope of the season. We're only able to discuss the quality of the park based on what they're shown us.

was he or was he not shot? didn't say he was an android or not, I asked was he shot. We saw him take the wound in the arm but feeling confident he got lit up early and suffered no consequences

Yes, he was shot; but he was shot by hosts, not by other humans, which was the point earlier.

You specifically asked whether we've seen hosts get shot with no consequences, which we haven't except in very particular cases. The Man in Black is not a host, so I really don't see how this detail has any bearing on the discussion.

that's not the point. If I want to kill hookers and you want to fuck them and I get there first, you cannot enjoy what the park is for you. You can't do what you want and you aren't guaranteed what you paid for. It's illogical for a business to do this

Think about this for a minute. You're not paying for the experience of specifically having sex with the robots, or specifically killing them. You're paying for an ultra-real experience in which contingency plays a factor (i.e. storylines can diverge, other actors can intervene, etc.). If someone is dissatisfied then they can choose not to return to the park; but it would appear to me that the park is doing just fine without catering to the particular demands of specific patrons.

When you consider the implications that endless exploration and stimulation has a brain, I'm not convinced by your point. I mean, it may be bad business practice; but I'm led to believe that it isn't hurting Westworld any.

sleep? hunger? thirst? physical exhaustion? erectile dysfunction?

We witness some of these in the first episode. As I said, I don't think such limitations pose any great threat to Westworld's overall concept.

It's a park for the mega-rich, the top less-than-one percent. It's a place to exercise the kind of fantasies other people play out in virtual reality, but to do them to actual physical beings. It's the rush of holding an actual weapon in your hand. Westworld banks on that experience, and it seems to be working.

didn't deny that this was shown in the series, just denying that it's 'reality' as we would call it.

You can speculate all you want about what's beyond the show, but there's not much more to be said.

ignoring philosophical and scientific discoveries/discussions just to implement your own world is a tad ridiculous but I don't have any interest in believing what the writers want to portray or want us to believe.

the season finale asks the viewer to contemplate 'reality' with the death of Ford and the 'choice' in Maeve's storyline. To act like the viewers cannot be manipulated in the same ways as Bernard or Dolores seems to not coincide with the questions/thoughts provoked by the 1st season

Viewers can definitely be manipulated like the androids - that I agree with. But the point is that we already were manipulated like the androids, led to believe things that were untrue.

You have no interest in taking the show's creators at their word. I can respect that. But in this case, I don't think there's much point in disregarding their comments and throwing our analysis to pure speculation.

What makes Westworld Westworld is that it's not VR. That's the entire premise of the park, and it's the aspect the makes it such a cash cow. We can speculate until next season whether it's only the appearance of physical interaction, but until then we can't know for sure.

 

[rms]

Yes, he was shot; but he was shot by hosts, not by other humans, which was the point earlier.

You specifically asked whether we've seen hosts get shot with no consequences, which we haven't except in very particular cases. The Man in Black is not a host, so I really don't see how this detail has any bearing on the discussion.

Yes, but the logistics here interests me. I think worldbuilding could be better than any storyline that doesn't directly involve Ford.

Are Westworld employees giving fake rounds and fake guns to all androids? If so, how many real rounds and real guns are distributed to humans once they enter? From what I recall, we see 'bullets' hit humans but no blood.

You're not paying for the experience of specifically having sex with the robots, or specifically killing them.

Didn't the man in blacks friend (younger self storyline) admit to being only interested in fucking and killing? And he was dragged out to Dolores by the man in black?

To act like all the visitors are interested only a storyline arc or some deep RPG-like experience seems counter intuitive to human nature.

but I'm led to believe that it isn't hurting Westworld any.

to act like this has been explored is just out there. We see a plethora of investors/customers at the reveal but maybe are privy to what, 5 customers inside Westworld? Not necessarily any consistency here.

As I said, I don't think such limitations pose any great threat to Westworld's overall concept.

You think the man in black is paying tons of money because he enjoys being tired at an old age or because he's so fascinated with the maze?

It's the rush of holding an actual weapon in your hand. Westworld banks on that experience, and it seems to be working.

Let's say this is true, when is this demonstrated in the show?

 

[rms]

you agree with Neurotica's question but we are both addressing the same illogical inconsitencies within the show. She may think it's unexplored or whatever, but i'm starting to ponder that they are in a Matrix-esque world and we are being shown that it's just this village full with androids in the middle of Arizona or Nevada or something.

 

[Einherjar86]

That's fine, but you can't prove it one way or another. When you asked whether we've seen how they "enter" the park, we have: they enter via train. This is what the show provides us with, and it's what the creators have admitted to being interested in - that is, the possibility of a theme park in which human patrons pay to interact with physical humanoids. To me, any speculation beyond this regarding details is pure fantasy. There's nothing of value to be said here. Your entertaining fantasies, which is fun, but not very productive.

I also addressed Neurotica's question specifically, and think that it's a far more pressing question than "What if they're in a virtual reality simulator???" Since they're not in a VR simulator, then the question of bullets is an important one. And, again, I've already given some suggestions above.

Finally, all my comments about the park's appeal - the thrill of holding a real gun, etc. - are theoretical comments on what it's designed to do, and they're substantiated by what the creators have said. I see little value in your financial objections.

Yes, we're privy to very few actual patrons, but that likely has more to do with the show's limits than with any narrative oversight. If you go back and rewatch the first couple episodes, you'll find references to many more patrons beyond the main ones we're introduced to. The show simply doesn't have the time to cover them substantially. It's up to us to believe that they're present, using the park.

And I will disagree with you if you say this is bad writing.

 

[rms]

not trying to prove here, advocating a theory

Neurotica and I addressed the same inconsistency...

i was thinking - what if 2 visitors meet each other in the park and not knowing that they're visitors but thinking they're hosts - shoot each other?

If I want to kill hookers and you want to fuck them and I get there first

Since they're not in a VR simulator

we don't know?

Finally, all my comments about the park's appeal - the thrill of holding a real gun, etc. - are theoretical comments on what it's designed to do, and they're substantiated by what the creators have said.

but you're citing an interview with the writers and not things in the show, which I think is a peculiar belief.

And I will disagree with you if you say this is bad writing.

if it is truly a park in the middle of Arizona, I definitely think it's poor writing/storyline whatever. Ignoring vital details while push the shit narrative of Maeve screams Walking Dead styled television

 

[Einherjar86]

not trying to prove here, advocating a theory

Neurotica and I addressed the same inconsistency...

I don't see that as the same inconsistency at all. You're pointing out things you see as contradictions that apparently suggest the park isn't a physical park.

Neurotica, as far as I could tell, was assuming the park is a physical park and asking a pertinent question about how newcomers are protected against "friendly" gunfire. This question presumes the physicality of the park, and I'm pretty sure the show did address it at some point.

You're citing conflicting desires among newcomers and claiming it suggests that a physical park wouldn't be optimal. I think you're going out on a limb here.

but you're citing an interview with the writers and not things in the show, which I think is a peculiar belief.

The writers can tell us about the show. It's like interviewing an author and asking about aspects of a novel. Does that mean this is the sole meaning of a text? Not at all - but it gives us substantive guidelines by which to assess a work.

To ignore their comments entirely strikes me as very misguided.

if it is truly a park in the middle of Arizona, I definitely think it's poor writing/storyline whatever. Ignoring vital details while push the shit narrative of Maeve screams Walking Dead styled television

Of course you do.

Here's the real kicker:

Even if future seasons reveal it to be some massive virtual reality platform that even the newcomers themselves are unaware of, it doesn't change the fact that they believe it to be a physical park now. They believe they're getting the full physical experience, in which case your criticism - that two newcomers with conflicting desires constitutes a potential financial drain for the park - makes absolutely no difference.

If they all think it's real, i.e. physical, then any conflict of desire wouldn't be remedied by personalized VR experiences, since that would ruin the illusion of physicality.

 

[rms]

I don't see that as the same inconsistency at all. You're pointing out things you see as contradictions that apparently suggest the park isn't a physical park.

we're both addressing customer experience. If you can get shot by accident because person Y thinks person X is really an android, is that really enjoyable/logical/marketable etc? Is that part of the 'thrill' -- that you can get killed?

It would make little sense to me that two people who understood human intelligence so well that they replicated it with near perfection would not consider how actual humans would/could likely interact within their park. You said it yourself, the androids would have to be given 'non piercing' bullets to combat the realism from earlier scenes in the season.

i'm in the if its physical it's really poorly demonstrated but I really think it's not physical, giving some hope to the writing staff. I kind of think they are on the fence. the reveal at the end implicates the customers are unaware of how pervasive Westworld's narrative can be but earlier inconsistencies within the season make it seem as though customers are in possession of some meta physical human form, immune to human weaknesses.

but it gives us substantive guidelines by which to assess a work.

but you aren't assessing it, you're just believing it.

that two newcomers with conflicting desires constitutes a potential financial drain for the park

it's not some sort of econ 101 critique, just trying to demonstrate inconsistent writing and the financial aspect is just one part.

 

[Einherjar86]

I don't think your points are valid. Sorry.

Your analysis opens the door to any kind of speculative fantasy we wish to indulge about a show. Maybe Westeros is just a simulation. Maybe Walter White is still alive. All possibilities, but nothing that we can speak about intelligently.

 

[EternalMetal]

The androids in the park have guns that can kill each other, but are not capable of killing biologically born humans. Why would the humans possess a different kind of gun? It seems to be implied that if technology has progressed to the point of making physically realistic androids, then having hi-tech ammunition rounds should also be feasible. Guests may be given more powerful ammunition than hosts, but this could also just be attributed to a difference in gun type. Also since the hosts are physically made and operated on after activation, I am led to believe that the park is a physical park. I am with Ein on this one.

That said, there is still the possibility of this park being even higher tech than it is presented to have. If someone were to bring a real gun into the park, would it have the same immunities like the ones provided by the staff? It doesnt seem to me that the show cares much about these types of tech explanations though. This isnt a hard sci-fi show.

 

[rms]

you can't just shoot projectiles and not have any effect. If you have non-human-skin piercing rounds, OK, but taking one to the face or bare flesh is still going to rock you, possibly kill you.

the 2nd paragraph I partially agree, it's half in the Walking Dead camp and half into real HBO television. We'll see where they decide to go with season 2

 

[Einherjar86]

This isnt a hard sci-fi show.

Definitely not - soft SF all the way.

you can't just shoot projectiles and not have any effect. If you have non-human-skin piercing rounds, OK, but taking one to the face or bare flesh is still going to rock you, possibly kill you.

the 2nd paragraph I partially agree, it's half in the Walking Dead camp and half into real HBO television. We'll see where they decide to go with season 2

I'm led to believe it's part of the androids' programming; that is, they're programmed never to shoot newcomers in the head. This is perfectly plausible, since we've learned how deeply conditioned they are by their directives (even if they can eventually overcome these directives...).

Regarding bullets, here's something I stumbled across:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...uns-work-hosts-guest-humans-die-a7382921.html

It seems it’s all down to the velocity of the bullets. Co-creator Jonathan Nolan elaborated on this to Rotten Tomatoes:

“We thought a lot about this. In the original film, the guns won't operate guest on guest, but we felt like the guests would want to have a more visceral experience here. So when they're shot it has sort of the impact. They're called simunitions. The U.S. military trains with rounds like the ones we're talking about. But there's a bit of an impact, a bit of a sting. So it's not entirely consequence-free for the guests.”

This suggests that either all of the bullets are low velocity - only leaving a bruise on human skin but being fatal to the Hosts’ less resistant skin - or the guns somehow fire one kind of shell at Hosts and another at Guests.

If this is the case, there could easily be a plot point involving it at some stage. The contract acknowledges that tampering with the guns is possible, and this could lead to a dramatic death scene as a Guest realises they’ve been shot for real.

It seems that androids would eventually somehow pick up on this; but then again, we also know that they've been programmed simply to "not see" things that don't cohere with their worldview. This is Westworld's soft-SF fallback mechanism: if it doesn't make sense to the androids, they don't see it.

 

[rms]

definitely plausible, but then that seems to contradict the realism lines hes spewed previously. shrug