Cacique Caribe | 23 Jan 2006 1:24 p.m. PST |
Or even the Cylons in BSG, for that matter? I would released a new strain of smallpox or something and have wiped out all the non-resistant population and then mopped up the rest, without resorting to nukes! Is my logic faulty? CC |
Hyun of WeeToySoldiers | 23 Jan 2006 1:29 p.m. PST |
> Is my logic faulty? Sure. From the standpoint of the movie studios (you know, the people who MADE the movie), it doesn't make for a compelling plot. Far more gripping to see a human battle against a seemingly-invincible cybord. If you go down this road
there are just far too many holes and gaps in logic in most movies. You'll just end up torturing yourself. |
wordwildwebb | 23 Jan 2006 1:37 p.m. PST |
'cause they needed them to use as batteries, right? Or is that the wrong movie? :-) |
Earl of the North | 23 Jan 2006 1:37 p.m. PST |
In Terminator "the Machines" didn't have access to biological weapons, just nukes. The early Terminator machines included small robots fitted with biologial syringes. I guess in the Terminator movies at least "the Machines" had to produce the Bio-weapons before they could use them. |
Meiczyslaw | 23 Jan 2006 1:45 p.m. PST |
Didn't Beihn's character in the first movie say that they'd been rounded up into camps? |
Guy Innagorillasuit | 23 Jan 2006 1:49 p.m. PST |
"If you're wondering how he eats & breathes, And other science facts
(la! la! la!) Then repeat to yourself its just a show, I should really just relax
" |
BrigadeGames | 23 Jan 2006 1:50 p.m. PST |
its a movie? plus machines unleashing an unseen enemy versus all the gunfire and destruction would have made the series a single entity movie franchise. |
Saber6 | 23 Jan 2006 1:57 p.m. PST |
Maybe they did. Our viewpoint is skewed by the information presented. |
Cacique Caribe | 23 Jan 2006 2:00 p.m. PST |
Well, not everyone would have succumbed to the plague, just like not everyone died from the nukes. Resistance groups would have still carried on. Plenty of targets left. But the factories and other high-tech infrastructure would have survived for the use of the machines, no? Also, I think, any effort to go back to the past would have brought the added risk of contaminating the population there, which I think would have made things interesting too. CC |
Patules | 23 Jan 2006 2:17 p.m. PST |
Well, according to them the world was relentlessly nuked in 2003. |
Nesto42 | 23 Jan 2006 2:32 p.m. PST |
Questions like this about Sci Fi concepts are the same thing as asking how a flying carpet works. It's all fantasy in the end. |
TERMINATOR | 23 Jan 2006 2:34 p.m. PST |
Because then we wouldn't have had the great Future War scenes. I do remember short story once where all the dogs are were coming down sick with something the humans thought was engineered. But a virus is not a cool as shiny Endoskeletons and Hunter Killers. |
Norscaman | 23 Jan 2006 2:47 p.m. PST |
For both, it would actually be internally inconsistent for machines to use bio-weapons when they see themselves as superior to biological humans. Plus, even the small-pox would not have done much to a space-faring race. They must have impressive medical technology to be a star-faring race. That works for BSG anyway. With Terminator (the movie, not the TMP guy above) I think that others are right that they lacked the goods. If there are no biologicals in your arsenal, you use the nukes! Also, frankly for both groups, nukes are a lot easier than plagues, unless you have plague carriers WITH the plague already. Fleas int he blankets, and that sort of thing. If you are trying to grow your own, good luck. The Iraquis were working on it for years and can't even use anthrax right. |
buddylee | 23 Jan 2006 2:48 p.m. PST |
I guess it's possible they just didn't think about it. Or, they may have lacked the manual dexterity to hold beakers and test tubes. Or, it's possible that their eyes lacked the ability to zoom in to the atomic level and robot eyes aren't well equiped for use of microscopes. |
LeadAsbestos | 23 Jan 2006 3:35 p.m. PST |
Maybe the goal was the destruction of all organic life in any form. A massive virus outbreak would only perpetuate the problem. |
bloodeagle | 23 Jan 2006 4:18 p.m. PST |
The machines could not use biological weapons in fear of the humans retaliating by downloading windows into thier computers. |
Cacique Caribe | 23 Jan 2006 4:43 p.m. PST |
|
Sir James | 23 Jan 2006 5:07 p.m. PST |
Drat! I had to shovel my driveway so you guys eat me to my points: 1) machines feared a retaliatory strike (aka comptuer virus)
although I like the Windows option better, 2) machines spurned the use of biological weapons b/c of "racism" (or "sense of superiority of mechanized things over biological ones"). Also, I believe that biologicals aren't really effective (well, compared to nukes). I just thought of another one: maybe the machines want the satisfaction of hunting down humans to make up for the decades of humans hunting machines (drones, computer games, etc.). |
Cacique Caribe | 23 Jan 2006 5:13 p.m. PST |
In your opinion, would these same reasons apply to the Cylons in Battlestar Galactica? CC |
CPBelt | 23 Jan 2006 5:23 p.m. PST |
"Drat! I had to shovel my driveway so you guys eat me to my points:" Sir James, I never knew TMP posters were so kinky! wink wink, nudge nudge. |
Alxbates | 23 Jan 2006 6:12 p.m. PST |
Maybe it was easier to manufacture mass amounts of pre-existing weapons than is would be to track down and modify a virus. |
Captain Oblivious | 23 Jan 2006 7:26 p.m. PST |
How about biological weapons weren't as popular when the movie was made, and so it wasn't considered? It would be like us trying to plan a war in 2050. We might guess a few of the weapons used, but not many. Try imagining the modern weapon theory from 1940. |
darthfozzywig | 23 Jan 2006 8:23 p.m. PST |
The radiation of the nuclear holocaust destroyed all the germs, creating a wonderful germ-free world for mankind. Well, at least for the handful of survivors. ;) |
Judas Iscariot | 23 Jan 2006 8:27 p.m. PST |
This last point makes the most sense
From the standpoint of a survivor of the Cold Wars
We were too scared about Nukes to worry much about Biological Weapons
Unless you also happened to read Michael chriton's works from the 1970s on the subject – then you worried about both. I also happened upon an NBC manual for the US army, and a translated one from the Soviet Union that both placed HEAVY emphasis upon the fact that the "other" side would probably resort to the use of biological weapons (Against treaty restrictions) early in the war (The one that didn't happen, but that they planned for – and that we mistakenly think we won. Few people mention the fact that the US also crashed even harder than the soviet Union in 1929. So, in effect you could say that the soviets had a pretty decent vindication of the inoperability of the Capitalist system at that point
But, that is wandering off the main point)
Biologics
Ignorance is probably the best answer, and the movie was written to prey on western fear of both nuclear holocost and machines (The Frankenstein complex again) |
Covert Walrus | 24 Jan 2006 1:28 a.m. PST |
Plus which, the machines may have relied upon some biological components for themselves. Releasing a bioagent that could mutate to attack something you need is not merely muddy thinking, youth, it is clearly NOT THINKING AT ALL. After all, the terminators used flesh bodies, maybe they also used bio-chips for certain functions like sense of chemicals or sight. |
Ironmammoth | 24 Jan 2006 2:29 a.m. PST |
OK so they don't like using bio weapons. WHAT ABOUT NANOBOTS!!! Programmed to kill all humans/life then reprocess the biowaste generated then self destruct! Perfect solution really, but very boring plot for a movie! |
Privateer4hire | 24 Jan 2006 5:56 a.m. PST |
Because some of the humans might have qualified as "Goodlife", useful to the Berserker cause. Oh, you did say BSG and Terminator, didn't you? On a tangent, anyone read/played GURPS Reign of Steel? I've heard that the author shows a Terminator-like world with some neat twists for the settings. Maybe that supplement has some suggestions on SkyNet's (or RoS's analogy: OverMind) failure to use bio-bugs. |
wrench347 | 24 Jan 2006 7:20 a.m. PST |
Cuz microscopic organisms don't photograph as well as Arnold!!! |
Ratbone | 24 Jan 2006 8:02 a.m. PST |
It's been mentioned. In the 80s the hype was war, nukes, etc. 90s terrorists, this decade it's biological anything, regardless of type, source, etc. |
DS6151 | 24 Jan 2006 10:12 a.m. PST |
For the same reason Skynet dind't send a second terminator back to 10 minutes after the last one failed. Skynet is mind numbingly stupid. The OS BSG Cylons wanted the planets for their biological masters, so no germs. The New BSG Cylons are apparently controlled by Skynet. See above. |
RockyRusso | 24 Jan 2006 10:58 a.m. PST |
Hi The science in terminator is the sort of understanding of the usual english major. Bio weapons are more difficult than you realize. Among other things you may not have noticed is that ALL of them are naturally available. CC is focused on early american indian/white guy conflict. And the usual accusation is that the white guys did bio warfare on the poor indian (before Pasture). The thing is this "weapon", small pox, was killing euros as well. AND the indians were giving the white guys their own suite of germs. Every bio weapon of today is merely a concentrated naturealy available bug. Terminators would need to have some source, and some way to understand why they were getting the 1918 flu versus the 1922 flu. AND, the easiest way to deliver is with other bio mechs that are "carriers" again difficult to engineer. AND THEN, if you deliver by machine, it is too easy to destroy the same agent through mishandling, heat and the like. so, even treating it as "real" and filmable, it isn't as easy as you imagine. Rocky |
Cacique Caribe | 24 Jan 2006 1:56 p.m. PST |
Rocky, Interesting guess. But no. My REAL focus is on how, if I was the Terminators or the Cylons, would I go about doing the best pest control job on my target planet, without destroying parts and other machinery I would need. What about "Neutron Bombs"? CC |
Cacique Caribe | 09 Nov 2006 12:45 a.m. PST |
Ha, ha . . . I guess the Cylon "skin jobs" are instead the ones who are going to be exposed to a little biological warfare! BSG episode "A Measure of Salvation": link CC |
Goldwyrm | 09 Nov 2006 7:38 a.m. PST |
If the machines viewed biologicals as beneath them, then it could be against their dogma to treat biological weapons as being useful. Their preference would then be to use non-biological methods to destroy life. Of course the "it's a movie" reason makes more sense to me. |
Cacique Caribe | 10 May 2007 11:07 a.m. PST |
For (hopefully) some suggestions on 28mm-30mm figures to represent uniformed Tech-Con Resistance troopers (c2030 AD): TMP link CC |
Red5angel | 10 May 2007 12:25 p.m. PST |
According to a couple of the comics (I don't want to get into a discussion on what is canon or not) they did use biological weapons but since the population was so sparse and spread out, they didn't work as well so weren't considere 'efficient' by skynet. Skynet still had control over an arsenal of nuclear weapons as well but chose not to use those either after the initial barrage except in a couple of rare instances. |
Mike at Xtreme Hobby | 10 May 2007 2:33 p.m. PST |
My take is this: I understand that Biological Weapons are both difficult to create and store, much more so deliver with any reasonable amount of effectivity. A machine inteligence as R5A indicates will utilize the most effective and efficient (including cost efficient) means of eliminating it's opponent- in that case, conventional warfare tactics. The Cylons from BSG:NG won't because they feel that the humans are still linked to them by means of their faith. By their actions on New Caprica, it becomes clear that the humans are important to them. The Cylons from BSG:TOS? Well
Now, why the Machines from The Matrix series didn't use more dibilitating methods of killing (especially in the third film when one neutron weapon should have ended Zion quite effectively) is beyond me. Perhaps Zion was shielded from nuclear radiation? Those APUs sure weren't shielded against much
The apologist in me says that the Machine City knew that they were losing control of Smith. They knew it at the end of the first film when Neo screwed up Smith's programming. They also knew that Neo would be coming, so, they wanted to use the assault on Zion as means of keeping Neo in line. *shrugs* The machines thinking ahead??? Cheers! |
Red5angel | 11 May 2007 9:13 a.m. PST |
Mike – I got the impression in the second film and the way the third film ended that it was part of the 'cycle'. this cycle may have been 'programmed' into the machines like say the huge cliff dives that lemmings go on occasionally. Maybe they could have used a nice neutron bomb to hit Zion but couldn't because some level of preservation, a small chance to allow humans to succeed on some level so things get reset. Who knows. |
DAWGIE | 11 May 2007 9:58 a.m. PST |
ACTUALLY, when looking at the number of "old skulls and skeletons and other bone parts" lying around in the wreckage of cities being fought over in the movies, i always expect that THE MACHINES had waged CBR/NBC/ABC ( depending upon which era you were in the military) warfare. too many bones and damaged structures about to have been in the optimum kill zones for single or multiple nukes bursting on the surface or in the air at the target . . . a lot of olks do not seem to realize that it is not unusual for more than one nuke to be targeted on the same target . . . think of it as insurance against the unforseen . . . DAWGIE
|
brotherjason | 18 Jun 2007 3:47 p.m. PST |
Judas Iscariot wrote: Few people mention the fact that the US also crashed even harder than the soviet Union in 1929. So, in effect you could say that the soviets had a pretty decent vindication of the inoperability of the Capitalist system at that point
Yes, but our system of government more or less came out intact from the crash, whereas the Soviet system of government was eventually replaced. So really wouldn't that face point to the resiliency of Democracy and Capitalism? |
brotherjason | 18 Jun 2007 3:51 p.m. PST |
On topic, keep in mind that the machines used Nukes because of the immediate threat that humans presented when they attempted to pull the plug on SkyNet. It is also probably consivable that once the nukes had been set off that most of the infrastructure that would be needed to make biological weapons was destroyed. In the end rebuilding the factories for the machines' weapons was probably faster and easier than trying to get a fully functional bioweapons lab operational again. |
Thornhammer | 18 Jun 2007 3:56 p.m. PST |
"For the same reason Skynet dind't send a second terminator back to 10 minutes after the last one failed. Skynet is mind numbingly stupid." If it didn't, that Sarah Connor Chronicles TV show is sure gonna be boring! I wonder how they'll avoid the "Terminator Of The Week" syndrome. |
Barks1 | 19 Jul 2007 3:28 a.m. PST |
Yeah, it always bugged me that GW's Tyranids didn't get better at germ warfare. Any biologist will tell you that small things are more efficient than big things, and yet the 'nids go around with bigger and bigger gribblies. If I was a genetically mutable hive mind wishing to wipe out a planet it would be with billions of invisible bugs, rather than a carnifex. It would make for a boring game, tho'. (Anyone remember the virus outbreak card in Dark Millenium?) |
Photonred | 19 Jul 2007 5:57 a.m. PST |
Skippy the Super Virus from Nuclear War ! |