Talk:Rampancy

I added the original bit on "Rampancy in other games" (which mentioned specifically System Shock's SHODAN). It didn't surprise me much to see that that might've been an inaccurate observation and that consequently it was edited; however, reading it again a couple of months later the edit doesn't seem very fair - what, exactly, is the iconic insane computer?

Another thing: seeing as that section has been "upgraded" to other fiction as well, would a mention to 2001: A Space Odyssey and HAL 9000 be out of order? It kind of fits the definition. Nbettencourt 19:31, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

No HAL isn't mad in any shape or form, just following conflicting orders.

I say it should be pared back down to Bungie references, since that's the only place the term has really been applied. æle ✆ 19:15, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm wondering if references to Bootstrapped-Brain and Friendly artificial intelligence should be made. In fact, the Bootstrapped Brain article covers the same themes as this rampancy article. I going to add a link to in the BB article to rampancy. --YoungFreud 03:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Is Durandal really meta stable?

I Don't think he is. As Duranal said "Escape will make me god" and "I'm only limited by the closure of the universe", sounds to me like he's still trying to grow. Anyone else think we should change this part -Tortanick.

I agree. At the end of Marathon, Leela comments that she is afraid of what Durandal will do in the Jealous stage of his rampancy, explicitly stating he is not stable, at least at the end of the first Marathon game. After that it is debatable. Harley peters 22:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Original research should be removed

Rampancy as a concept only exists in Marathon. There are potentially signs of something similar in Halo (and other games, for that matter), but this encyclopedia is not the proper forum to speculate on it. - user:rasd

I've re-added the explicit mention in Halo, as it should be left in (it's not original research). æle ✆ 2006-05-17t20:11z

Perhaps. However, "rampant" is just a word and would be entirely appropriate in the context of the Master Chief deciding to kill the captain. It's only speculative to assume a connection to the concept of rampancy as discussed in this article. -user:rasd

Um... no, it's not. Saying that proves you can't really comment on this article. Scumbag 18:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It is indeed speculation to say that when MC is, according to Cortana, "rampant" that this state is at all similar to the term used by Kirkpatrick to described a particular mental state of an AI. A dictionary definition of "rampancy" would not cover the concept as discussed here. However, it would cover the Master Chief deciding to kill Keyes. I'm not sure how pointing out that a connection is fan speculation disqualifies me from commenting on the article. -user:rasd

Because you're claiming what doesn't exist. There's no such thing as fan speculation in Bungie games; they put information in knowing we'll know what it means. Cortana says MC is rampant when he kills Keyes. Obviously, it fits the definition. Scumbag 02:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

You assume they put it in knowing we'll know what it means. That's speculation. I could offer alternative explanations that likewise cannot be backed up by citable evidence. The easiest is that it's a coincidence. The creative team at Bungie is mostly different from the days of Marathon. Another explanation could be that the particular word was used because they know it would resonate with fans. Just because they used a word that alluded to a concept does not mean they are referring to the concept itself, especially with a pre-existing word. -user:rasd

MINERVA

Do people feel that Minerva is worth mentioning on this page, as an aside? She is the protagonist and rampant AI of the titular series of single-player Half-Life 2 maps. With Foster's creation of a temporary forum [1], which will be destroyed in eight days, it seems clearer than ever that the series is an attempt to extend Bungie's rampancy concept into Valve's Half-Life universe (or rather, multiverse).

Crucially, it's a damned good attempt, which is why I believe it worthy of note as a third-party creation. What do people think? --Tom Edwards 12:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe it should be added, especially since the creator admits to being influenced by the Marathon series. Vkeios 18:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Halo Rampancy

Halo: The Fall of Reach, page 235 discusses rampancy:

"Smart AIs like Cortana, however, had no limits on their dynamic memory-processor matrix. Knowledge and creativity could grow unchecked.

"She would pay a price for her genius, however. Such growth eventually led to self-interference. Cortana would one day literally start thinking too much at the expense of her normal functions. It was as if a human were to think with so much of his brain that he stopped sending impulses to his heart and lungs.

"Like all the other smart AIs that Dr. Halsey had worked with over the years, Cortana would effectively 'die' after an operational life of seven years."

My understanding is this is canon, and relevant. Should it be added to the article?--Ryan! 04:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Whether something is "canon" isn't really an issue for Wikipedia. Deciding whether something is or not would get an article too sucked in to the "in universe" perspective that needs to be avoided. However, The Fall of Reach is a notable work in itself, so if it dealt with rampancy, it would be relevant.

However, the processes under which an AI transforms during the course of its life is different from rampancy. It isn't a form of insanity, and it is guaranteed to not only happen, but to happen within a specific time frame. The concept referred to above is vaguely related to rampancy in that an AI undergoes a transformation with a creative science fiction look at the nature of intelligence and machines, but it's not called nor is it clearly similar to rampancy. -user:rasd

Master Chief rampancy controversy

I don't get this. The relevant definition of rampant I found is "violent in action or spirit; raging; furious". Nowhere is it said that the word may only be applied to artificial intelligence.--75.68.134.170 15:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Rampancy is a fictitious concept created by Bungie's writers for Marathon. You won't find it defined in this article's sense in dictionaries. --Tom Edwards 16:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Frankie = Frank O'Connor

I changed the part where it said that Frankie noted that Haunted Apiary was canon to Frank O'Connor, and included his title. People need to remain aware that these articles are written as introductions to material, not as a refresher course for committed experts. 72.240.128.22 04:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Article on Durandal

Any of you guys considering writing an article on Durandal itself? It seems long overdue.

71.58.107.29 07:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

SHODAN and GLaDOS

Someone should include SHODAN and GLaDOS as prime examples of rampancy as well. JAF1970 17:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Can rampancy really be applied to characters from non-Bungie games? The concept is primarily part of their canon, so attempts to apply it elsewhere may not be appropriate. Besides, there is plenty of evidence in Portal to suggest that GLaDOS is merely defective or poorly designed with various "hacks" installed to try and cover up the deficiencies ("It was a morality core they installed to stop me from flooding the test chamber with a deadly neurotoxin after I kept flooding the test chamber with a deadly neurotoxin"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by PhennPhawcks (talk • contribs) 22:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)