About The Markus Thing, Because I Basically Agree With Everything Else, I Still Do Think His Story Had

About the Markus thing, because i basically agree with everything else, I still do think his story had potential (if we just changed basically everything Cage wrote for him).

The whole deviating thing was,, a trainwreck at best and went fully against what Markus was preaching. There's no reason why they couldn't have used a persuasion mechanic where you had to win over the other androids through dialogue (almost like in life is strange before the storm) LIKE HOW YOU DO SO WITH CONNORR. Markus probably had a bunch of stories about how he was mistreated as an android and he couldve shown them those instances on the little holograph screen all androids just have in their hand.

I would've even given it a pass if it was Markus overriding the androids idle state so they are just able to hear him out, and if he put any androids not wanting to participate in the revolution back into their idle code or whatever. The way the androids just blindly followed him was so upsetting. That shit completely fucked over his story AND EVEN MARKUS DOESN'T SHUN AWAY FROM FROM THE FACT THAT EVERYONE IS HAILING HIM AS ROBOT JESUS AND USING HIS WORD AS GOSPEL SO WHATS EVEN THE POINT OF ALL THIS DEVIANT FREE WILL BULLSHIT. But i digress.

I also do think that not just Markus' story but the story as a whole would've benefited from a longer timeline. The first time i finished playing through the game i never paid attention to the time stamps on the bottom left corner so imagine my surprise when i found out the timeline wasnt like a nearly a month and instead was only a WEEK (nearly half of which makrus didn't even spend at Jericho).

If the chapters were more spread out and, maybe hot take, if another chapter was added for each character, the pacing would be sooo much better.

Overall I think Markus' story has potential if we got rid of the weird virus-esque diviation, made the timeline longer, and created a whole other system of discrimination towards androids instead of Cage's inappropriate ass attempt at making an allegory to slavery, civil rights, and the Holocaust all in one go.

On top of the androids leading to the worst unemployment rates in modern history, their own blood literally powers the red ice epidemic. Cage could've so easily constructed the narrative that people were using the androids as a scapegoat for their misplaced anger which should be on cyberlife, the multi billion dollar company which essentially created all the unrest in the impoverished communities in the game. (Aka this game could've been an anti capitalist hit piece/hj)

I don't know if any of that made sense and might've started rambling but yeah, we need to bar Cage from ever writing story games again because half this game needs to be either scrapped or rewritten.

I am six years late to this conversation, but I recently bought Detroit Become Human and just got through the big “Kamski Test” scene. And while many people consider it to be one of Connor’s iconic scenes, I left it absolutely infuriated and now hate it with a passion.

For reference, I managed to befriend Hank extremely early on in the game and continue to maintain a very good working relationship with him. Hank, if he is alive for it, will always come into the house with Connor and will always get upset when Kamski poses his stupid little “test”.

This test is presented to Connor as having one of two choices, with one of two outcomes:

Kill Chloe and show that you believe androids are machines, or

Spare Chloe and show that you believe androids are living beings.

I think this logic works fine if Connor is alone, but it becomes fatally flawed when used in Hank’s presence, especially if you're playing a Connor that has a neutral-to-good relationship with him. This is because Hank's presence and subsequent negative reaction creates another completely logical reason as to why Connor might choose to spare Chloe:

Spare Chloe not because Connor believes she is a living being, but because Hank seemingly does.

No matter whether Conner ends up going deviant or staying a machine, killing Chloe in Hank's presence will severely negatively impact their relationship—potentially even to the point of ruining it. Ruining his relationship with Hank would mean losing access to future help and cooperation, both of which are something I think some versions of Connor would use as part of his strategy. So these Connors would be understandably wary of doing things that he knows will piss Hank off and potentially jeopardize future investigations. After all, Kamski could end up lying to them or going back on his word. The information he gives them could end up being useless, negligible, or stuff they already know.

Connor is a walking super processor—the most advanced model ever made by Cyberlife—so I don't think it's realistic that he would view a situation like a Hank-present Kamski Test as so black and white. It's possible to arrive at the Spare Chloe conclusion without bringing one's own emotions into it: that's thinking strategically, potentially even manipulatively. That's understanding consequences and weighing your options.

Similarly, I think it's unrealistic that Kamski, the supposed super genius, wouldn't realise Hank's reaction presented a problem to the logic of his perfect little test.

I can excuse the other mostly unsubtle, sometimes questionable writing, but this was such a glaring logical hole that I actually had to take a break to cool off from this scene. It is mind-boggling to me that this was never given as a post-event debrief dialogue option, and Connor just goes straight into freaking out.

it doesn’t suit you well anyways.

her

Phew, this one was not easy to draw! I am satisfied with the final result though. Procreate says that the piece took me 9 hours 46 minutes and 7840 strokes haha.

Hope you like it too! :> he's just chilling

The picture was referenced from one of the virtual photos that @singularity-ps4 posted on their twitter

I do agree that David cage did a pretty poor job writing out some of Connors scenes, and i think this is a really good analysis of one of those instances. At the same time i think it wouldn't really make a lot of sense in a choice and story based game to be creating different outcomes in the already many choices you're making in Detroit. Like the game wouldn't just stop and ask you if you're sparing Chloe because you have ulterior motives. Plus if you're playing the game for the first time you wouldn't even know having a good relationship with Hank comes in handy later on (not that it even really matters since you dont need Hank's distraction to get to the evidence room).

Though I'm obviously not trying to say that it being a video game is an excuse for poor story planning and writing. I do think this scene could've been written better but i think this is very minor compared to a lot of the other things in Detroit.

I am six years late to this conversation, but I recently bought Detroit Become Human and just got through the big “Kamski Test” scene. And while many people consider it to be one of Connor’s iconic scenes, I left it absolutely infuriated and now hate it with a passion.

For reference, I managed to befriend Hank extremely early on in the game and continue to maintain a very good working relationship with him. Hank, if he is alive for it, will always come into the house with Connor and will always get upset when Kamski poses his stupid little “test”.

This test is presented to Connor as having one of two choices, with one of two outcomes:

Kill Chloe and show that you believe androids are machines, or

Spare Chloe and show that you believe androids are living beings.

I think this logic works fine if Connor is alone, but it becomes fatally flawed when used in Hank’s presence, especially if you're playing a Connor that has a neutral-to-good relationship with him. This is because Hank's presence and subsequent negative reaction creates another completely logical reason as to why Connor might choose to spare Chloe:

Spare Chloe not because Connor believes she is a living being, but because Hank seemingly does.

No matter whether Conner ends up going deviant or staying a machine, killing Chloe in Hank's presence will severely negatively impact their relationship—potentially even to the point of ruining it. Ruining his relationship with Hank would mean losing access to future help and cooperation, both of which are something I think some versions of Connor would use as part of his strategy. So these Connors would be understandably wary of doing things that he knows will piss Hank off and potentially jeopardize future investigations. After all, Kamski could end up lying to them or going back on his word. The information he gives them could end up being useless, negligible, or stuff they already know.

Connor is a walking super processor—the most advanced model ever made by Cyberlife—so I don't think it's realistic that he would view a situation like a Hank-present Kamski Test as so black and white. It's possible to arrive at the Spare Chloe conclusion without bringing one's own emotions into it: that's thinking strategically, potentially even manipulatively. That's understanding consequences and weighing your options.

Similarly, I think it's unrealistic that Kamski, the supposed super genius, wouldn't realise Hank's reaction presented a problem to the logic of his perfect little test.

I can excuse the other mostly unsubtle, sometimes questionable writing, but this was such a glaring logical hole that I actually had to take a break to cool off from this scene. It is mind-boggling to me that this was never given as a post-event debrief dialogue option, and Connor just goes straight into freaking out.

🤘🤘