# Talk:Detroit: Become Human

Hello
Currently, there are in the article only two images of two of the voice actors; Jesse Williams (Marcus) and Valorie Curry (Kara), but no image of another important voice actor; namely Bryan Dechart who is featuring Connor, another main character in the game. Personally I have not yet completely figured out how to add images to Wikimedia Commons, but if someone could upload an image of Bryan Dechart to add to the gallery section, that would be great. I was thinking of perhaps this one (although obviously in a smaller size).
An image of "Hank" could also be appropriate. 
Thank you. Okama-San (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Red Ice. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 01:11, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

@ForTheGoodOfAllofUs: Hi. If your point is that it needs mentioning that Alice being an android is a plot twist, then I have no problem with that. However, this information can be said far more succinctly than a lengthy bracketed sentence (which look uglier the longer said sentence goes on for) saying it wasn't known beforehand nor when it takes place in the game (to me, the latter point about the timeline is pretty irrelevant). Also, as I've previously highlighted, neither source explicitly states that audiences did not know about the plot twist pre-release: having one source reporting on the controversy, the other detailing the plot twist, and then combining the two to state that "this was not known when the trailer released, nor when the scene takes place in-game" is WP:SYNTH. I propose something like the following: "(the game later reveals in a plot twist that Alice is in fact an android and the father is its owner)". Let me know what you think. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 18:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
So it really comes into several points
1. Alice is an Android, and not a human, it's a plot-twist.
2. This plot-twist was not known when the trailer showed up and got criticism for Alice being a beaten girl. 
3. The plot-twist is not known when the scene takes place, thus the audience who plays the game think that as well, up to when the twist is revealed.
I think all 3 are important to understand as a part of the controversy, to understand what was the perspective in each "stage" that represents the flow of information.
Point 2 is implicitly provided with both sources because a) if it's a plot-twist (late on in the game), it's not known to the audience. b) the article provides the initial wrong perspective that Alice is a girl and Todd is her father (which is also the perspective the game attempts to suggest when the scene takes place), while both are wrong. The issue with the proposal is that it diminishes point 2 and partially point 3. I do understand your concern about point 2, and as said before it is difficult to find news outlets that discuss some important Video Game information, and in particularity discussing this controversy in retrospective that also don't have spoilers.  You have here examples here for articles that tackle the topic such ways, with e.g. saying that "The challenge with controversy from people who have not played the game they are critiquing is that content in any media is about the context in which it is presented to its audience."  https://www.askaboutgames.com/why-is-detroit-become-human-so-controversial  https://kotaku.com/i-still-think-about-detroit-become-human-s-tales-of-ab-1832445931 https://www.alphr.com/games/1009162/detroit-become-human-preview-interactivity-domestic-abuse/ 
I think your current suggestion is better than the last one. I also think we need to see how we add all 3 points are presented to provide a full perspective of the topic with the new information. ForTheGoodOfAllofUs (talk) 19:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@ForTheGoodOfAllofUs: I understand where you're coming from, but if relevant information is not reliably sourced then it shouldn't be included. I'm also having trouble finding a reputable source that mentions both the pre-release controversy and the reveal Alice is an android. If you have no objections, then I will edit the article with my suggestion. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
There is no "pre-release controversy" Alice and and "reveal" Alice per say. The storyline is designed for that plot-twist (and has impact on certain endings). The source I attached in the article, as well as one that I attached above, demonstrates that Alice is an Android. It's also in the Synopsis. You are also welcome to check https://detroit-become-human.fandom.com/wiki/Alice. The story is not known to be changed due to that controversy (one could argue that the response as in here saying "people should... see it in context to really understand it would point to the contrary https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/nov/05/detroit-become-human-how-not-to-turn-child-abuse-into-a-game ). Are you familiar with the game? I'm asking because asking for source for "Alice is an android" is a good signal you are not familiar it.
I still retain the stance that is self-explanatory (I accidentally used earlier the word explicit for implicit, fixed) as a plot-twist, instead of looking for statement such as "this was not known prior to the game's release" (find such statement would have made it easier, but as said gaming news outlets have severe limitations when it comes to things like that that also act as a spoiler). Maybe someone else who is familiar with the game could make a decision on the matter. We can go with "with the game's release, it is  revealed in a plot twist that Alice is in fact an android and the father is its owner" if you find that better. ForTheGoodOfAllofUs (talk) 21:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not very familiar with the story, however it doesn't really matter how knowledgeable someone is of it as it's what the sources say that takes precedence above anything else (unless of course a source reports something that is objectively false and should be replaced with another). You can ask another editor to give their opinion, but I'm sure they'll say the same thing. We can go with a slightly trimmed version of your suggestion. Wikibenboy94 (talk) 22:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I think it's self-explanatory once you know what's it's talking about. I don't see any way to trim the suggestion I had; I assume you just suggest there reverting to the version you brought up earlier. If not then may as well specify it out. Pinging the last one to edit on the talk page for opinion (someone that is not us nor a bot). :@Mika1h: ForTheGoodOfAllofUs (talk) 17:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Seeing Wikibenboy94 has agreed to the form I suggested later on, this matter is closed. ForTheGoodOfAllofUs (talk) 19:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

...Markus bypasses his programming, thereby becoming a deviant android with full autonomy and sentience, leading the police to shoot him at arrival. I just watched a Twitch streamer play this level, and while Markus does become a deviant in that sequence, that's not what I saw. I saw the perpetrator/burglar (presumably a human) verbally, then physically assault Markus, and the stress that this causes the person whom Markus serves as caretaker prompts a fatal heart attack. Markus rushes to this dying person, who has fallen to the floor, seconds before two police officers enter. The burglar points to Markus and tells the police that Markus "did it", i.e., killed the now-dead person. One of the officers fires his gun without giving Markus the expected instructions to get on the ground, etc. I understood this as an unjustified police shooting foreshadowed by the many expressions of humans' hatred of androids earlier in the game. —⁠71.105.243.101 (talk) 00:03, 26 January 2025 (UTC)