Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Synthia]

Recently, a friend had a conversation where there was a disagreement over whether something was possible or not.

Evelopedia says one thing (that it is not). However, it is possible to observe ingame, information that says the complete opposite.

So what then takes precedence ? What is a character to believe, when the game and evelopedia disagree ?

As it was, the conversation deteriorated, with accusations that one side was "a liar". Which was somewhat less than ideal.

[Saede Riordan]

Well what's in the game in some ways is just not accurate to the world portrayed by the canon, you obviously can in fact leave your CQ according to the lore. So The lore itself should be taken by value over something purely mechanical.

If its an ingame piece of lore, such as mission texts, with a grain of salt, you can mostly take everything at face value. I generally assume with missions and exploration, that one capsuleer ran this specific site at one point, and these are just reused details of one event. Like questing in WoW.

Evelopedia items overall I will take as probably the most solid though. That area probably contains the most up to date lore, and its where the developers are actually focusing their story designs. With that in mind, that information is probably the most up to date, and the most accurate outside of having a dev actor tell you it really just is one way or the other.

[Horatius Caul]

Impossible to rule one way or the other if we don't know what we're talking about.

[Synthia]

Impossible to rule one way or the other if we don't know what we're talking about.

Evelopedia states that cloning requires some data being sent to the new clone, the "neural scan" that the capsule does, for example. Without that neural scan, the clone is not conscious.

Ingame, the blood raider cosmos missions, state that it is possible to clone a functioning* person from cells taken from a long dead corpse, where there woud simply not be a neural scan to use in the cloning process.
This is not just a one-off, several of the missions refer to this being the case.

*for a certain definition of functioning - they walk, talk, but may or may not be lucid.

To complicate this unnecessarily further, there is also the evidence in the books, where an individual clone was awakened without the neural scan, and as a result had amnesia.

[Ghost Hunter]

If designed properly, a person can be fully cloned to a complete biologically functional state. Their 'memories' and 'personality', however, are entirely different.

Without the information of the original's mind design, clones built from genetic samples are little more than babies in adult bodies. Some conditioning may be applied to accelerate their mental development, but nothing to the effect of them retaining the original's memories in any capacity.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Aye, I agree, there is cloning, and there is cloning. In one case it refers to the 'cloning' of a certain person, complete with it's identity, memories, etc. In the other case it's just referring to growing another human with the same genetic make up. The two things can be true at the same time therefore, as they don't refer to the same thing - they just use the same word for different things.

[Horatius Caul]

The current Evelopedia article on cloning seems to be a straight copy of the cloning Scientific Article from like... 2001-2002? Those are somewhat questionable PF at best. Not sure what it's doing on the wiki.

If you read the whole thing, it should be evident that capsuleer clones aren't technically produced by cloning - they're biomass slabs superficially molded to look like a specific person. Other clones referred to in the PF don't necessarily have to be produced in the same way, and could actually be proper clones. Additionally, it's possible that not all cloning companies manage brain pattern transfers in the same way as Chromeaux do.

Basically, arguing to the point of namecalling over this topic seems rather dumb - considering how much wiggle room there is.

[lallara zhuul]

I would have the opposing opinion in the EVElopedia vs game info.

Game info overrides EVElopedia mainly for the reason that there has been less review of the data put in there.

Anyone can put information into EVElopedia, but into the game it has to be checked and rechecked several times.

[Morwen Lagann]

Patently false.

Articles in the lore database/portal are put up by CCP employees, and are marked as official pages.

They are not editable by anyone except devs, GMs and ISD. If a player spots an error, they have to post to the talk/discussion page for that article.

[lallara zhuul]

I wasn't talking specifically about the lore database/portal part of the EVElopedia.

I was talking about the whole tool.

Any player can create a page in EVElopedia.

Therefore EVElopedia seems to be a IC/OOC tool for propaganda and therefore misinformation.

The in game stuff that you come across, usually is subjective but the bias is clear and present therefore you automatically take it with a grain of salt.

EVElopedia is biased, EVElopedia is used for propaganda and misinformation by its users and therefore it is not any more trustworthy than any source of information that you gain from New Eden.

[Saede Riordan]

That bias vanishes completely if you only consider the official CCP lore pages.

[Horatius Caul]

I wasn't talking specifically about the lore database/portal part of the EVElopedia.

But that's what the rest of us are talking about.

[Ollie]

The two positions aren't mutually exclusive if you're willing to make concessions.

Evelopedia states that cloning requires some data being sent to the new clone, the "neural scan" that the capsule does, for example. Without that neural scan, the clone is not conscious.

Ingame, the blood raider cosmos missions, state that it is possible to clone a functioning* person from cells taken from a long dead corpse, where there woud simply not be a neural scan to use in the cloning process.

The first is the process as we understand it for soft clones and infomorph capsuleers. The old clone ceases to exist, or is put into stasis, the consciousness including memories and personality are transferred into a new clone/biological shell.

The second paragraph describes the Jurassic Park process. Ghost Hunter describes it best in his post above - a clone body with full biological function is activated and awakens with only partial or no memory/personality construct in place depending on the level of completeness of a (neural scan imprint if one was undertaken at all). In Jurassic Park you only see the cloned beasts running on instinct which is part of the biological function. You don't get to see them trying to overcome the essential question of "who am I?" because the only speaking lines Spielberg gave to extinct creatures went to Jeff Goldblum and Sam Niell. Another, perhaps better example, is the whale who has approximately 30 seconds to come to terms with his existence in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

The point is the two positions don't cancel each other out.

TL;DR: Read what Ghost Hunter said.

[Esna Pitoojee]

What my immediate assumption when I saw the original discussion was is that the clones described in the COSMOS arc are cloned from pure genetic material, with no neural mapped consciousness, and the nascent mind subjected to a regimen of psychological conditioning and subconscious indoctrination and training.

This wouldn't produce an entirely accurate replication of the original, but then this is someone who had been dead for a great many years. What it will produce is a perfect icon, someone (something?) utterly convinced he has been resurrected to be a leader - a figure capable of being a figurehead to the Raiders he was "reborn" by.

Of course, the products may not be terribly stable either. But then, the arc does have quite a number of them going rogue...

[Lyn Farel]

I wouldn't mind a clearer, more precise, exhaustive and accurate portrayal of all the cloning processes from CCP tbh.

The way it is in currently makes me mostly stay away from this and I generally try to just use the basics (I use neural mapping when dying in capsule, thus I clone). But for jumpclones ? How are they possible without the capsule neural scanner ?

Frankly, everything contradicts everything on cloning, so I am very reluctant to use it ICly in the current state of things.